Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 168937 comments on the Best of New Orleans story from Jan 6, 2011, titled Evolution vs. Creation. In it, Best of New Orleans reports that:

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Best of New Orleans.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#100070 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
"It means that, absent the evidence, it makes no sense to believe it DID take place."
Your above statement is a fine example of a shut mind. You need to say nothing more of your concept that if it doesn't exist it never did unless otherwise proved. People that think like you never do anything because it would mean you'd have to look for evidence of something you claim can't exist because you don't see it.
By the way, since you claim if such a huge number wandering around the Sinai would have HAD to of left OBVIOUS evidence right where we should find it by sight alone, explain the following for me I took from the web.
Each of these dictators and the numbers historians and researchers have declared are 'estimates' for how many people they killed, why don't you give me links to the 'supposed historical researched evidence' that states where these 'supposed' 82 million to 182 million dead decaying bodies are okay? This is modern research 'estimating' of killings that happened in the last century, not 2400 years ago. Their figures can't be to0 far off can they?
1. Adolf Hitler – around 11 million
2. Joseph Stalin – anywhere from 20 to 100 million
3. Chairman Mao Zedong – 50 to 70 million
4. Pol Pot – around 1 million
Here, let's do one easier for you. It's estimated up to 700,000 soldiers died in the civil war. Why don't you show me where these 700,000 graves are huh? They have to be somewhere to prove upwards of 700,000 soldiers died in that war right?
Here, try this one instead. Prior to 1492 it's an estimate that there were 15 to 20 million native Americans on this continent. Why don't you show the evidence for these 15 to 20 million natives existence? Some evidence for their existence exists is a fact. But evidence for 15 to 20 million? Where is that much evidence?
Waiting..........
This is absurd. There is evidence for each of the example you cited. Can we account for every single body? No. So what? That isn't necessary. Do I need to post pictures of the mass graves?

Same rules: Can you provide any evidence at all for the Exodus?

"People that think like you never do anything because it would mean you'd have to look for evidence of something you claim can't exist because you don't see it."

OK, let's see it.

“Good day to you!”

Level 2

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#100071 Sep 25, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
No glitch, archaeological facts are involved here
How you interpret the authors writing is you own affair, It remains fact that geological action took place then as is does now. The experience of a tsunami or a volcano or other eruption in no way suggest that the writer had inside knowledge of the deep.
And of course 3,000,000,000 times more water than is known to exist using modern science and technology to estimate is a considerable amount more than the average geyser could eject.
Noo, there is a glitch. A big glitch from both pro and con sides of the flood story.
First, here's a fact about mythical floods/global floods and many predate the Bible flood story in age. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.h...
The curious and un-explainable part is how all these separate different cultures for thousands of years spoke of flood stories instead of global fire stories or global earthquake stories or global ice age stories etc. Their preoccupation with flood/global stories makes no rational sense in light of all the other natural catastrophes they could have turned into a myth and didn't as they did with flood/global flood myths.
Next as to the 'glitch', theists behind the global flood myth assume it took place according to the Bible time line and assume the earth's geography looked then as it does now. Those against the myth are making their same calculations upon the same material theists use. Neither side will win for losing doing this.
The writer stated a global flood happened. Other cultures on this earth state in myth a global flood happened. Instead of trying to prove it didn't happen, open minds should be investigating the possibilities if it could have happened and forget the theism angle.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#100072 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
A fine example of a poster with a restrictive mentality of what can't be done and or accomplished with the human mind. You'd make a great fricking scientist who tells other what can't be done because you said it's impossible...lolol....to fricking funny dude.
I have a link for you. Maybe you should read his work concerning what I spoke of. He summed up idiots of suppressed thinking like you in the following..."..our natural creativity is limited by the prejudices of logic and the structure of accepted categories and concepts." Man was he ever describing individuals like you dude!
http://creativethinking.net/WP01_Home.htm
I'm asking you to explain, in scientific terms, EXACTLY how you conclude that we "only use 10% of our creative potential." That is bullshit that has been debunked as myth long ago. I even gave you the links.

Instead of responding with a factual explanation of your tired cliché, you attack me for pointing out that you are, in fact, talking nonsense.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#100073 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Noo, there is a glitch. A big glitch from both pro and con sides of the flood story.
First, here's a fact about mythical floods/global floods and many predate the Bible flood story in age. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.h...
The curious and un-explainable part is how all these separate different cultures for thousands of years spoke of flood stories instead of global fire stories or global earthquake stories or global ice age stories etc. Their preoccupation with flood/global stories makes no rational sense in light of all the other natural catastrophes they could have turned into a myth and didn't as they did with flood/global flood myths.
Next as to the 'glitch', theists behind the global flood myth assume it took place according to the Bible time line and assume the earth's geography looked then as it does now. Those against the myth are making their same calculations upon the same material theists use. Neither side will win for losing doing this.
The writer stated a global flood happened. Other cultures on this earth state in myth a global flood happened. Instead of trying to prove it didn't happen, open minds should be investigating the possibilities if it could have happened and forget the theism angle.
Where are you getting this nonsense? The geography of the earth has not significantly changed since man has walked the earth. The evidence has already shown that a global flood never happened.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#100074 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
"It means that, absent the evidence, it makes no sense to believe it DID take place."
Your above statement is a fine example of a shut mind.
No, it's actually an attempt to get you to understand how SCIENCE works. If there is evidence for a phenomenon, then it is researched further and eventually codified as a scientific theory, which stands until something else that is better at explaining the phenomenon comes along.
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, since you claim if such a huge number wandering around the Sinai would have HAD to of left OBVIOUS evidence right where we should find it by sight alone, explain the following for me I took from the web.
I didn't say that, you moron.

I DID say that top Israeli archeologists have concluded that there is no archeological evidence of such a massive movement of people over 40 years. And there presumably WOULD be -- graves, granaries, cooking pits, pottery, walls, settlement boundaries, etc.

These are professional, working Israeli archeologists who say there is no evidence of the presence of a large # of people in the Sinai in that period.
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Here, let's do one easier for you. It's estimated up to 700,000 soldiers died in the civil war. Why don't you show me where these 700,000 graves are huh? They have to be somewhere to prove upwards of 700,000 soldiers died in that war right?
Who cares where all the graves are. But we have MUCH evidence of the various BATTLEFIELDS, don't we?

So, in the case of the Civil War, those historical mass movements and activities left behind obvious traces.

In the case of the supposed Exodus? Nothing. And this from highly trained professionals who KNOW what to look for and would find the evidence if it were there.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100075 Sep 25, 2013
Cybele wrote:
It's your arrogance that deludes you to believe that one branch of science is superior to others.
Yes, some branches of science are superior to others. Newtonian mechanics is inferior to relativity is inferior to quantum physics.
Cybele wrote:
Stop dreaming. You don't hold the key to the real truth about life. You will come and go without knowing it.
You want to tell me that my claims has nothing to do with science, who the f-- are you kidding? really? I know things that science cannot explain.
Your baseless philosophical opinions are irrelevant.
Cybele wrote:
So I'm doing you all a damn favor.
Yes, by providing a fine example of ignorance, and a lot of mirth.
Cybele wrote:
You obviously base your arguments based on your own BIAS, calling God a Jew magic for instance, and you don't care because you're just here with an agenda so you could care less what others have to offer to the table.
How is an accurate description biased? Of course the invisible magic wizard might not really be Jewish, it's just that all the Abrahamic religions assume so.
Cybele wrote:
Your mind is set with what you have learned and don't want to learn anything new. You don't want to question anything because it wasn't covered in the textbook or maybe because you're just an ass.
Look, I have been following science for some time now and I know what they are up to.
Indeed, it's the evil worldwide atheist materialist Darwinist evolutionist conspiracy!
Cybele wrote:
And you, you're stuck on the evolution propaganda. Science will not make progress if it ceases to tap the unknown.
Actually evolution, same as other sciences, DO tap the unknown. That's how science works. And in so doing make the unknown become known. Tiktaalik being a fine example.

You are implying that there are alternate ideas to be explored which are not being considered. However so far no-one has presented any.

What this means is that you have nothing to complain about. But you complain anyway.
Cybele wrote:
And what is this claim of yours that when something occurs "naturally" there is no need for a creator? Does that even make sense? So the first particles came to existence naturally, nothing created them. DUH. When you get a life, you will learn something.
Which particular particles are you referring to? Life? I already explained (duh) that they HAD a creator. If it were a purely natural non-divine non-magical event then that creator was chemistry, using the abundance of chemicals which had been on this planet for well over half a billion years.

Or were you referring to the universe itself? In which case if you reject Big Bang cosmology your "scientific alternative" is Godmagic. NOTHING created God. Apparently this is NOT a problem for Godmagic, but IS a problem for anything that ISN'T Godmagic.

Astoundingly massive hypocrisy noted.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100076 Sep 25, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm pointing out the discrepancy in the Genesis.
"The"?
Cybele wrote:
It was written before the calendar was invented
No it wasn't. It was written before OUR calendar was invented, approximately one and a half millenia ago.
Cybele wrote:
so obviously there is some inaccuracies in the interpretation of the Word.
No shite, Sherlock.
Cybele wrote:
Who ever said it was a valid "scientific" text?
Creationists.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100077 Sep 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, OK. It sounded like some sort of accusation.
It was. She follows 'em but still has problem learning.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100078 Sep 25, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
the Genesis in the bible has been misinterpreted, or should I say, written inaccurately.
Another valid, and highly likely possibility, was that it's made up BS.
Cybele wrote:
But that doesn't mean "nothing" created "everything."
Nor is that our claim. It also has ZERO bearing on the validity of evolution. In answer to the question of what ultimately started off the Big Bang, the CORRECT answer is that no-one knows yet. It is NOT "Science can't explain everything yet so therefore an invisible magic wizard didit."
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100079 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
A fine example of a poster with a restrictive mentality of what can't be done and or accomplished with the human mind. You'd make a great fricking scientist who tells other what can't be done because you said it's impossible...lolol....to fricking funny dude.
I have a link for you. Maybe you should read his work concerning what I spoke of. He summed up idiots of suppressed thinking like you in the following..."..our natural creativity is limited by the prejudices of logic and the structure of accepted categories and concepts." Man was he ever describing individuals like you dude!
http://creativethinking.net/WP01_Home.htm
Gratuitous self-promotion aside I will for now assume that this guy's a great business man and done lots of wonderful things for all the companies he said he's worked for and not a crank. So far there is little evidence you have anything close resembling his abilities of 'creative thinking'.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100080 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
"It means that, absent the evidence, it makes no sense to believe it DID take place."
Your above statement is a fine example of a shut mind. You need to say nothing more of your concept that if it doesn't exist it never did unless otherwise proved. People that think like you never do anything because it would mean you'd have to look for evidence of something you claim can't exist because you don't see it.
No, in the case of the flood it simply didn't happen not only because of the lack of evidence, but also because of the rather MASSIVE evidence against it.

The fact we're all here to talk about it for one.
No Surprise wrote:
By the way, since you claim if such a huge number wandering around the Sinai would have HAD to of left OBVIOUS evidence right where we should find it by sight alone, explain the following for me I took from the web.
Each of these dictators and the numbers historians and researchers have declared are 'estimates' for how many people they killed, why don't you give me links to the 'supposed historical researched evidence' that states where these 'supposed' 82 million to 182 million dead decaying bodies are okay? This is modern research 'estimating' of killings that happened in the last century, not 2400 years ago. Their figures can't be to0 far off can they?
1. Adolf Hitler – around 11 million
2. Joseph Stalin – anywhere from 20 to 100 million
3. Chairman Mao Zedong – 50 to 70 million
4. Pol Pot – around 1 million
Here, let's do one easier for you. It's estimated up to 700,000 soldiers died in the civil war. Why don't you show me where these 700,000 graves are huh? They have to be somewhere to prove upwards of 700,000 soldiers died in that war right?
So all dead things have graves? Never heard of that one before.
No Surprise wrote:
Here, try this one instead. Prior to 1492 it's an estimate that there were 15 to 20 million native Americans on this continent. Why don't you show the evidence for these 15 to 20 million natives existence? Some evidence for their existence exists is a fact. But evidence for 15 to 20 million? Where is that much evidence?
Waiting..........
Just to clarify - your position is make any claim you like and it's valid even though you can't present a shred of evidence? Just trying to figure out how seriously you want to be taken.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100081 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
I never stated the writer was describing evolution. Your bad for not reading what I wrote. Stop assuming. You know how it makes you look :)
I never said the Bible was "a history book" so your bad again. Stop assuming what I said that I never stated, really. The Bible does contain history. If you don't know that you're more of a self deluded idiot then I took you for.
It contains a LOT of history, of the myths of the theologies of Christianity and Judaism. Of ACTUAL history, somewhat less so, especially when one takes into account of the fact that there's always "interpretation issues" (because everyone likes to claim what they think the writers meant), and then there's the REAL interpretation issues and reinterpretation issues and reinterpretation issues via multiple translations through the ages, the loss of the originals and the subsequent influences of the likes of Constantine and King James, etc.

Know whose other writings contain a lot of history? Egyptians. But that doesn't necessarily mean there existed man-Gods with heads of birds and dogs.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100082 Sep 25, 2013
whut wrote:
<quoted text>what's a "quotemine?"
And it's "called you out on." If you're going to resort to nit-picking typos, at least clean your own yard, first.
You're making the kittens nervous. It was slang, and mine was just as valid as yours (both expressions rooted in competitiveness). I wasn't nitpicking typos, otherwise I would not have used the term "quotemine" in the first place.

A quotemine is taking words out of context or omitting some words so as to alter their original meaning in order to support an opposing argument. It's a form of dishonesty, something which liar for Jesus Tzar is guilty of in spades.

For instance, Psalm 14:1 states: "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God."

If I were to say the Bible says "There is no God", my claim would be true, but taking it out of context as I have omitted nearby text which clarifies the statement.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#100083 Sep 25, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm pointing out the discrepancy in the Genesis. It was written before the calendar was invented, so obviously there is some inaccuracies in the interpretation of the Word.
Who ever said it was a valid "scientific" text?
Genesis was probably written around 900-500 BC. Well after mankind had figured out the length of the days and years.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#100084 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Noo, there is a glitch. A big glitch from both pro and con sides of the flood story.
First, here's a fact about mythical floods/global floods and many predate the Bible flood story in age. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.h...
The curious and un-explainable part is how all these separate different cultures for thousands of years spoke of flood stories instead of global fire stories or global earthquake stories or global ice age stories etc. Their preoccupation with flood/global stories makes no rational sense in light of all the other natural catastrophes they could have turned into a myth and didn't as they did with flood/global flood myths.
Next as to the 'glitch', theists behind the global flood myth assume it took place according to the Bible time line and assume the earth's geography looked then as it does now. Those against the myth are making their same calculations upon the same material theists use. Neither side will win for losing doing this.
The writer stated a global flood happened. Other cultures on this earth state in myth a global flood happened. Instead of trying to prove it didn't happen, open minds should be investigating the possibilities if it could have happened and forget the theism angle.
You write:
"Instead of trying to prove it didn't happen, open minds should be investigating the possibilities if it could have happened and forget the theism angle."

Open religious minds did investigate the possibility that there was a flood. It happened in the late 1600's / early 1700's when the scientists of the day (naturalists) started noticing things that did not fit in with a universal deluge.

Since those early time hundreds if not thousands of scientists have been looking for ANY sign of Noah's flood.

To sum up the scientific communities findings about a universal flood....NOTHING happened, it's a Hebrew myth.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100085 Sep 25, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
Noo, there is a glitch. A big glitch from both pro and con sides of the flood story.
First, here's a fact about mythical floods/global floods and many predate the Bible flood story in age. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.h...
The curious and un-explainable part is how all these separate different cultures for thousands of years spoke of flood stories instead of global fire stories or global earthquake stories or global ice age stories etc. Their preoccupation with flood/global stories makes no rational sense in light of all the other natural catastrophes they could have turned into a myth and didn't as they did with flood/global flood myths.
Not really, as there are a number of good reasons for this:

1 - Plagiarism. Many religions in nearby areas are similar to each other as they literally took stories from earlier religions, such as Abrahamic religions taking the deluge story from the earlier Babylonian ones. However this does not explain stories from other parts of the world.

2 - There is massive evidence of great big massive floods, especially near the end of the last ice age around ten to eleven thousand years ago. These things affected many other places and not just the Middle East. Ergo other cultures wrote about them. There is also the severity of the phenomena - bar a supervolcano, there is NO more Earth-bound destructive force than a giant flood. Take the recent Tsunami for instance which quite literally traversed the entire planet numerous times over, but even this paled in comparison to some of those ancient floods. So while they were certainly powerful and significant enough to warrant some major mythmaking, the actual physics of the phenomena simply do not match the myths for reasons already explained, unless we suspend physics.

3 - As for other natural disasters you mention, fires, Earthquakes, you will likely find stories about those in multiple cultures too, but they simply are not as destructive nor their affects as long lasting. As for giant meteorite we haven't been hit with one of those for millions of years, which explains why no-one's got major stories about those.
No Surprise wrote:
Next as to the 'glitch', theists behind the global flood myth assume it took place according to the Bible time line and assume the earth's geography looked then as it does now. Those against the myth are making their same calculations upon the same material theists use. Neither side will win for losing doing this.
I won't use the term 'theist' as it's too broad, however creationists are fond of promoting the global flood myth as fact. However the facts are that geology does not support creationists. Creationists are NOT using the same material (evidence), they are using the Bible. Scientists use evidence, and the evidence points to no Biblical flood. Big massive floods, yes, but not to the extent of the Noah story.
No Surprise wrote:
The writer stated a global flood happened. Other cultures on this earth state in myth a global flood happened.
They were incorrect.
No Surprise wrote:
Instead of trying to prove it didn't happen, open minds should be investigating the possibilities if it could have happened and forget the theism angle.
Already happened. The closest you can get are numerous giant floods evident at the end of each ice age epoch. Other than that, stop complaining that your story has no evidence and conflicts with reality.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#100086 Sep 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Where are you getting this nonsense? The geography of the earth has not significantly changed since man has walked the earth. The evidence has already shown that a global flood never happened.
But it just MIGHT have!!! What if it DID??

:-(

http://zamabatkhela.com/wp-content/uploads/20...

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#100087 Sep 25, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, some branches of science are superior to others. Newtonian mechanics is inferior to relativity is inferior to quantum physics.
I thought you were "scientifically inclined" or well versed in Science.

Those are not branches of science. They're different laws, principles, and theories. There are laws and theories that supersedes others and older ones. I'm talking about how you think the theory of evolution which is in the branch of Biology is superior to Physics or Chemistry, but it is NOT.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branches_of_scie...

All you have been presenting is Evolutionist propaganda. You don't want NEW information because you think only highly qualified with titles next to their names can do so. And so you kiss their a$$ instead of actually contributing something.

“Jesus is Lord”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

Greenwood, Indiana

#100088 Sep 25, 2013
The only thing atheist can prove is they are nothing but a bunch of liars FACT. Evolution is nothing but lies, there is no truth in it, only lies that people made up. On the other hand Creation have got truth to it, 100% proof one word tells the truth and that word is "Prophecy". Why is this word tells the truth, that is easy to answer, "GOD DO NOT TELL LIES FACT END OF STORY"....

“Truder 3/4 mile, call the ball”

Level 2

Since: May 11

Truder 505 ball, 2.5

#100089 Sep 25, 2013
This argument has been raging since before Darwin’s first edition of "The Origin" (Nov. 24, 1859). In it, due to his lack of current empirical evidence and knowledge of Mendel's work, he makes some very impressive mistakes based on "blending of traits" rather than more current "selective" traits. Due to the lack of current knowledge, Darwin did not realize that the theory of genetics with which he was operating was lethal for the concept of natural selection. But, upon further research into his own findings by taking into account other geologists, biologists and naturalists of the time, he did refine his views to come up with "selectivity of traits". 20th century evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould was one quoted as saying "Darwinian evolution is a bush, not a ladder". This implies that the species of the earth have not been in their current forms since the beginning of time, nor would they remain so.
British geneticist J. B. S. Haldane was asked by theologians if there was anything that could be concluded about the Creator from the study of Creation. His reply, although humorous was also apocryphal; "God has an inordinate fondness for beetles".
By the 5th edition of “The Origin”, Darwin had refined his theory enough to be esteemed by Tufts University philosopher Daniel C. Dennett as no less than “the single best idea anyone has ever had.”
To Darwin,“survival of the fittest” meant the same as “natural selection”. That is; those organisms with selectively favored and heritable characteristics are the ones who most successfully pass them to their offspring. Ergo, the use of “fittest” was not meant to describe those species that will survive, but rather to those who, when compared to members of their own species, could be expected to survive because they were better adapted to the environment.
So, to the environment…(Insert your favored cataclysmic event here (be it actual or described in scripture)).
“Uniformitarianism” is the theory at the base of this discussion. This theory, is one form or another, has been debated since Aristotle. Uniformitarianism states that all things that “were” in the immeasurable past must remain so for the unforeseeable future (meaning all life and all environments). However, with the advancements in geology, Lord Kelvin notwithstanding, this theory has been universally disproven. Countless geologists, hydro-geologist, paleontologist, paleo-geologists, paleobotanists , geomorphologists, climatologists, paleo-climatologists and slews of physicists have provided even greater quantities of research that give a fairly accurate (accurate enough for this discussion at least) that the age of the earth is greater than 4.4 billion years but less than 4.6 billion (commonly accepted within the scientific communities as 4.54 to 4.56 billion years). This number is, for the religiously minded, Satan’s work and meant to expose the heretics.
In conclusion,(this is a too short and wholly incomplete compilation of my views on this topic for brevity’s sake) evolution exists whether you believe in a dogmatic stricture or not, it exists. Without it, we, and in fact, all living things on this planet would not have survived this long. Climates change, plates move, tides shift, rivers flood or go dry, glaciers advance and recede; and yet, we still progress toward something. That something is as yet unknown and will (me… being philosophical for a moment) continue to adapt until an eventual end. Or, we as a species, find further afield new homes with in our galaxy to inhabit; to explore and adapt to new environments.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Child Sex Offenders 3 min Wolftracks 18
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 5 min KNIGHT DeVINE 12,096
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 30 min wichita-rick 165,421
News Friends trying to hand off rice cooker cause sc... 38 min wichita-rick 3
News California couple married 75 years dies in each... 55 min wichita-rick 4
Whatcha' doing? (Apr '12) 1 hr Joey 8,672
Danger!!! Chicago's Oak Street Beach has NO sa... 2 hr Virtual tourist 14
The Gettsburg Address 3 hr Susan B 25
motorcycle traveling stories 3 hr Ferret 1,246
More from around the web