Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

For discussing anything related to physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics, and their practical applications.

Moderator: Flannel Jesus

Is the Darwinistic selection principle false?

Yes.
7
27%
Probably.
4
15%
Perhaps.
0
No votes
No.
14
54%
I do not know.
1
4%
 
Total votes : 26

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby LaughingMan » Tue Aug 04, 2015 1:08 am

Lev Muishkin wrote:
LaughingMan wrote:This thread proves once again the hilarity and absurdity of evolution. Naturally evolution has no direction or final destination despite what the Social Darwinians would like to pretend everybody else should believe in.


The point about Social Evolution is that people can chose. So duh yeah it can have direction.


Yes, subjectively and relatively speaking. Objectively? No.
Coming Out Live Streaming Online From The Global Gulag, Asylum, Police State, And Oligarchical Plantation Near You.

Image
User avatar
LaughingMan
Cynical Asshole
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:47 pm
Location: FEMA Region V, U.S.S.A.

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby zinnat » Tue Aug 04, 2015 5:58 am

LaughingMan wrote:
zinnat wrote:
LaughingMan wrote:^^^I consider societal contribution a false dictomy.


If that was true, you were not communicating with the people from all over the world without moving an inch from your place. It becomes possible for you because of the contributions of the many generations in the past.

Contribution does not mean merely empathy or helping others. Whatever one does in any field, small or big, is contribution. Yes, it may be either positive or negative.

And, this capacity of contribution is precisely what differs humans from other animals. Animals are unable to contribute to their society. That is why they are there where they were thousands of years ago, but humans evolved continuously.

With love,
Sanjay



To be judged by so called contribution to society is to admit being owned by it.


True.

But, why fear the reality and run from it?
Just because it puts some responsibility on one's shoulders?

That is what true maleness is; not to run away from the responsibilities but own those willingly as they come in the life.

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3700
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby James S Saint » Tue Aug 04, 2015 8:21 am

zinnat wrote:but humans evolved continuously.

With love,
Sanjay

Into???

Sometimes evolution really doesn't know when to quit.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby zinnat » Tue Aug 04, 2015 11:44 am

James S Saint wrote:
zinnat wrote:but humans evolved continuously.

With love,
Sanjay

Into???

Sometimes evolution really doesn't know when to quit.


Yes, that happens. But, it will be learned eventually one day for sure.

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3700
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby LaughingMan » Wed Aug 05, 2015 4:28 am


True.

But, why fear the reality and run from it?
Just because it puts some responsibility on one's shoulders?

That is what true maleness is; not to run away from the responsibilities but own those willingly as they come in the life.

With love,
Sanjay



You're not talking about responsibility, you're talking about indentured servitude. Good luck trying to sell that.


With magnificence,

LaughingMan
Coming Out Live Streaming Online From The Global Gulag, Asylum, Police State, And Oligarchical Plantation Near You.

Image
User avatar
LaughingMan
Cynical Asshole
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:47 pm
Location: FEMA Region V, U.S.S.A.

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Arminius » Wed Aug 05, 2015 8:34 pm

@ ALL

Genes and memes do not work in the same way. So Richard Dawkins' meme theorie is false too.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby objet petit a » Wed Aug 05, 2015 10:47 pm

Arminius wrote:@ ALL

Genes and memes do not work in the same way. So Richard Dawkins' meme theorie is false too.

In fact, it is not so original either. *Cough* Aristotle.
Phase one, man objectifies in two cardinal numbers two collections he has counted; phase two, with these numbers he realizes the act of adding them up.
~Immanuel Kant

<<Warum willst du dich von uns Allen
Und unsrer Meinung entfernen? >>
- Ich schreibe nicht euch zu gefallen,
Ihr sollt was lernen.
~Goethe
User avatar
objet petit a
Thinker
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 10:11 pm
Location: Borderless

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby zinnat » Thu Aug 06, 2015 3:28 am

LaughingMan wrote:

True.

But, why fear the reality and run from it?
Just because it puts some responsibility on one's shoulders?

That is what true maleness is; not to run away from the responsibilities but own those willingly as they come in the life.

With love,
Sanjay



You're not talking about responsibility, you're talking about indentured servitude. Good luck trying to sell that.


With magnificence,

LaughingMan


There is a lot of difference between the two, or rather they are just the opposite, if one can understand and discern.

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3700
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Lev Muishkin » Thu Aug 06, 2015 10:50 am

LaughingMan wrote:
Lev Muishkin wrote:
LaughingMan wrote:This thread proves once again the hilarity and absurdity of evolution. Naturally evolution has no direction or final destination despite what the Social Darwinians would like to pretend everybody else should believe in.


The point about Social Evolution is that people can chose. So duh yeah it can have direction.


Yes, subjectively and relatively speaking. Objectively? No.


Your distinction is invalid. Direction is direction. Nothing is objective.

"Science is entirely Faith Based.... Obama is Muslim....Evil is the opposition to life (e-v-i-l <=> l-i-v-e ... and not by accident). Without evil there could be no life.", James S. Saint.
"The Holocaust was the fault of the Jews; The Holocaust was not genocide", Kriswest
"A Tortoise is a Turtle", Wizard
" Hitler didn't create the Nazis. In reality, the Judists did ... for a purpose of their own. Hitler was merely one they chose to head it up after they discovered the Judist betrayal in WW1, their "Judas Iscariot";James S Saint.
These just keep getting funnier.
User avatar
Lev Muishkin
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4037
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:58 am

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby LaughingMan » Sat Aug 08, 2015 2:49 am

zinnat wrote:
LaughingMan wrote:

True.

But, why fear the reality and run from it?
Just because it puts some responsibility on one's shoulders?

That is what true maleness is; not to run away from the responsibilities but own those willingly as they come in the life.

With love,
Sanjay



You're not talking about responsibility, you're talking about indentured servitude. Good luck trying to sell that.


With magnificence,

LaughingMan


There is a lot of difference between the two, or rather they are just the opposite, if one can understand and discern.

With love,
Sanjay



Not really.
Coming Out Live Streaming Online From The Global Gulag, Asylum, Police State, And Oligarchical Plantation Near You.

Image
User avatar
LaughingMan
Cynical Asshole
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:47 pm
Location: FEMA Region V, U.S.S.A.

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby LaughingMan » Sat Aug 08, 2015 2:51 am

Nothing is objective yet my distinction is invalid......
Coming Out Live Streaming Online From The Global Gulag, Asylum, Police State, And Oligarchical Plantation Near You.

Image
User avatar
LaughingMan
Cynical Asshole
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:47 pm
Location: FEMA Region V, U.S.S.A.

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Lev Muishkin » Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:45 am

LaughingMan wrote:Nothing is objective yet my distinction is invalid......


You can still be wrong regardless of objectivity and subjectivity.

"Science is entirely Faith Based.... Obama is Muslim....Evil is the opposition to life (e-v-i-l <=> l-i-v-e ... and not by accident). Without evil there could be no life.", James S. Saint.
"The Holocaust was the fault of the Jews; The Holocaust was not genocide", Kriswest
"A Tortoise is a Turtle", Wizard
" Hitler didn't create the Nazis. In reality, the Judists did ... for a purpose of their own. Hitler was merely one they chose to head it up after they discovered the Judist betrayal in WW1, their "Judas Iscariot";James S Saint.
These just keep getting funnier.
User avatar
Lev Muishkin
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4037
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:58 am

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Arminius » Tue Aug 11, 2015 1:43 am

objet petit a wrote:
Arminius wrote:@ ALL

Genes and memes do not work in the same way. So Richard Dawkins' meme theorie is false too.

In fact, it is not so original either. *Cough* Aristotle.

Criticism of Dawkins' meme theory:

Luis Benitez-Bribiesca M.D., a critic of memetics, calls the theory a "pseudoscientific dogma" and "a dangerous idea that poses a threat to the serious study of consciousness and cultural evolution". As a factual criticism, Benitez-Bribiesca points to the lack of a "code script" for memes (analogous to the DNA of genes), and to the excessive instability of the meme mutation mechanism (that of an idea going from one brain to another), which would lead to a low replication accuracy and a high mutation rate, rendering the evolutionary process chaotic.

British political philosopher John Gray has characterized Dawkins' memetic theory of religion as "nonsense" and "not even a theory... the latest in a succession of ill-judged Darwinian metaphors", comparable to Intelligent Design in its value as a science.

Another critique comes from semiotic theorists such as Deacon and Kull. This view regards the concept of "meme" as a primitivized concept of "sign". The meme is thus described in memetics as a sign lacking a triadic nature. Semioticians can regard a meme as a "degenerate" sign, which includes only its ability of being copied. Accordingly, in the broadest sense, the objects of copying are memes, whereas the objects of translation and interpretation are signs.[clarification needed]

Fracchia and Lewontin regard memetics as reductionist and inadequate. Evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr disapproved of Dawkins' gene-based view and usage of the term "meme," asserting it to be an "unnecessary synonym" for "concept," Mayr reasoning that concepts are not restricted to an individual or a generation, may persist for long periods of time, and may evolve

Sources:

- Benitez Bribiesca, Luis (January 2001), "Memetics: A dangerous idea" (PDF), Interciencia: Revista de Ciencia y Technologia de América (Venezuela: Asociación Interciencia) 26 (1): 29–31, ISSN 0378-1844, retrieved 2010-02-11, "If the mutation rate is high and takes place over short periods, as memetics predict, instead of selection, adaptation and survival a chaotic disintegration occurs due to the accumulation of errors."

- Gray, John (2008-03-15), "John Gray on secular fundamentalists". The Guardian (London).

- Deacon, Terrence, "The trouble with memes (and what to do about it)".". The Semiotic Review of Books 10: 3.

- Kull, Kalevi (2000), "Copy versus translate, meme versus sign: development of biological textuality". European Journal for Semiotic Studies 12 (1): 101–120.

- Fracchia, Joseph, R. C. Lewontin (February 2005), "The price of metaphor", History and theory (Weleyan University) 44 (44): 14–29, doi:10.1111/j.1468-2303.2005.00305.x, ISSN 0018-2656, JSTOR 3590779, "The selectionist paradigm requires the reduction of society and culture to inheritance systems that consist of randomly varying, individual units, some of which are selected, and some not; and with society and culture thus reduced to inheritance systems, history can be reduced to "evolution." [...] [W]e conclude that while historical phenomena can always be modeled selectionistically, selectionist explanations do no work, nor do they contribute anything new except a misleading vocabulary that anesthetizes history."

- Mayr, Ernst (1997), "The objects of selection". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (Stanford University's HighWire Press®) 94 (6): 2091–2094. doi:10.1073/pnas.94.6.2091. PMC 33654. PMID 9122151. Archived from the original on November 15, 2013.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Lev Muishkin » Tue Aug 11, 2015 12:41 pm

Arminius wrote:Criticism of Dawkins' meme theory:
.


What's your point?

The critique as well as the meme theory itself both assume natural selection as true. So you are only clouding your argument with lack of understanding.
The great thing about NS is that it is a priori true, almost definitively true, and beyond refutation. It is tautologically truth.
Nothing anyone has said here changes that. In fact the only criticisms that have been offered all assume NS to be true.

"Science is entirely Faith Based.... Obama is Muslim....Evil is the opposition to life (e-v-i-l <=> l-i-v-e ... and not by accident). Without evil there could be no life.", James S. Saint.
"The Holocaust was the fault of the Jews; The Holocaust was not genocide", Kriswest
"A Tortoise is a Turtle", Wizard
" Hitler didn't create the Nazis. In reality, the Judists did ... for a purpose of their own. Hitler was merely one they chose to head it up after they discovered the Judist betrayal in WW1, their "Judas Iscariot";James S Saint.
These just keep getting funnier.
User avatar
Lev Muishkin
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4037
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:58 am

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Arminius » Tue Aug 11, 2015 1:14 pm

Ignorance upon ignorance.

Some people are not capable of seeing a tree, if one shows them a forest.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Lev Muishkin » Wed Aug 12, 2015 10:44 pm

Arminius wrote:Ignorance upon ignorance.

Some people are not capable of seeing a tree, if one shows them a forest.


The point is that you don't have a point. You've copy/Paste dumped your crap onto the thread without relevance or understanding.

"Science is entirely Faith Based.... Obama is Muslim....Evil is the opposition to life (e-v-i-l <=> l-i-v-e ... and not by accident). Without evil there could be no life.", James S. Saint.
"The Holocaust was the fault of the Jews; The Holocaust was not genocide", Kriswest
"A Tortoise is a Turtle", Wizard
" Hitler didn't create the Nazis. In reality, the Judists did ... for a purpose of their own. Hitler was merely one they chose to head it up after they discovered the Judist betrayal in WW1, their "Judas Iscariot";James S Saint.
These just keep getting funnier.
User avatar
Lev Muishkin
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4037
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:58 am

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Arminius » Wed Aug 12, 2015 10:54 pm

Try to read this thread, and then you will see that you are absolutely wrong.

And if you are not interested in this thread, then search for another thread.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Lev Muishkin » Fri Aug 14, 2015 9:45 am

Arminius wrote:Try to read this thread, and then you will see that you are absolutely wrong.

And if you are not interested in this thread, then search for another thread.


I've read it through. I am correct in what I have said. You are not thinking through. the "Darwinistic Selection" is assumed by all the posts to be true. The problem is that you do not properly understand the principle, how it works ,and cannot make the simple distinction between it and the one human example that you think refutes it.

It's like you are not very bright. But I think if you read my posts properly, then you will understand where you have gone wrong.

Natural Selection works whether or not you like it.

"Science is entirely Faith Based.... Obama is Muslim....Evil is the opposition to life (e-v-i-l <=> l-i-v-e ... and not by accident). Without evil there could be no life.", James S. Saint.
"The Holocaust was the fault of the Jews; The Holocaust was not genocide", Kriswest
"A Tortoise is a Turtle", Wizard
" Hitler didn't create the Nazis. In reality, the Judists did ... for a purpose of their own. Hitler was merely one they chose to head it up after they discovered the Judist betrayal in WW1, their "Judas Iscariot";James S Saint.
These just keep getting funnier.
User avatar
Lev Muishkin
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4037
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:58 am

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Arminius » Fri Aug 14, 2015 3:53 pm

Try to learn to read, boy! You have not read the whole thread correctly. I never said the natural slection did not work. Try to read my posts, boy!
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby James S Saint » Fri Aug 14, 2015 4:18 pm

Natural selection stops working when it stops being natural.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Arminius » Fri Aug 14, 2015 5:16 pm

James S Saint wrote:Natural selection stops working when it stops being natural.

Exactly.

=D>
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Lev Muishkin » Fri Aug 14, 2015 7:25 pm

James S Saint wrote:Natural selection stops working when it stops being natural.


No. Natural Selection is NOT Natural Selection when it is not Natural.


Darwin makes this crystal clear in Origin of Species where he lays out very carefully the DIFFERENT types of selection that exist.
For example he devotes a special chapter to Domestic Selection, where conscious human choices are made in the selection of traits and behaviours in domesticated animals and plants.
He also points out the excessive evolution is sexual traits due to what he calls sexual selection.

Natural Selection, a process not teleological in any sense has no aim, so to say "it" stops working for x,y,or z, is false. The "principle" though remains intact, regardless of the results. Individuals unfit to reproduce fail to pass in their genes.

I've read Origin of Species and the Descent of Man from cover to cover, and have studies much of his other works. You are only speaking from ignorance. Darwin, though writing 150 years ago was well ahead you you nay sayers. Every thing you've brought to the table he'd already thought through.

"Science is entirely Faith Based.... Obama is Muslim....Evil is the opposition to life (e-v-i-l <=> l-i-v-e ... and not by accident). Without evil there could be no life.", James S. Saint.
"The Holocaust was the fault of the Jews; The Holocaust was not genocide", Kriswest
"A Tortoise is a Turtle", Wizard
" Hitler didn't create the Nazis. In reality, the Judists did ... for a purpose of their own. Hitler was merely one they chose to head it up after they discovered the Judist betrayal in WW1, their "Judas Iscariot";James S Saint.
These just keep getting funnier.
User avatar
Lev Muishkin
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4037
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:58 am

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Arminius » Mon Aug 17, 2015 3:13 pm

You are obviously not capable of understanding more than two words in one sentence!
__________________________________________________________________________

2 years old children are capable of understanding whole sentences although they can merely produce 2 or 3 words in one sentence by themselves.
Some adults are not capable of understanding whole sentences although they can produce them by themselves.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Image
Last edited by Arminius on Mon Aug 17, 2015 9:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby James S Saint » Mon Aug 17, 2015 3:30 pm

Lev Muishkin wrote: Individuals unfit to reproduce fail to pass in their genes.

That is only true if you define "unfit" as "did not reproduce", which makes the whole thing tautological and pointless.

Lev Muishkin wrote:You are only speaking from ignorance. Darwin, though writing 150 years ago was well ahead you you nay sayers. Every thing you've brought to the table he'd already thought through.

Bull
Shit
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Is the Darwinistic Selection Principle False?

Postby Lev Muishkin » Tue Aug 18, 2015 1:59 pm

James S Saint wrote:
Lev Muishkin wrote: Individuals unfit to reproduce fail to pass in their genes.

That is only true if you define "unfit" as "did not reproduce", which makes the whole thing tautological and pointless.

Lev Muishkin wrote:You are only speaking from ignorance. Darwin, though writing 150 years ago was well ahead you you nay sayers. Every thing you've brought to the table he'd already thought through.

Bull
Shit


A tautology is a perfect argument because it describes something two ways.
Darwin described Natural Selection as a "principle" of nature. This is not pointless because it accurately describes exactly how the next generation is "selected" in nature.
So if you will kindly refer to the THREAD TITLE. You will understand why the question can only be answered "no".

As for your uninformed "no". Please indicate any point made in this thread that Darwin did not cover in hsi vast series of writings that related the the thread, and I will try to quote him for you.

If you have time to educated yourself, please consult Darwin Online. Which is a complete collection of all publications, notes and correspondence.

http://darwin-online.org.uk

"Science is entirely Faith Based.... Obama is Muslim....Evil is the opposition to life (e-v-i-l <=> l-i-v-e ... and not by accident). Without evil there could be no life.", James S. Saint.
"The Holocaust was the fault of the Jews; The Holocaust was not genocide", Kriswest
"A Tortoise is a Turtle", Wizard
" Hitler didn't create the Nazis. In reality, the Judists did ... for a purpose of their own. Hitler was merely one they chose to head it up after they discovered the Judist betrayal in WW1, their "Judas Iscariot";James S Saint.
These just keep getting funnier.
User avatar
Lev Muishkin
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4037
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:58 am

PreviousNext

Return to Science, Technology, and Math



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users