Comments
556,101 - 556,120 of 720,213 Comments Last updated 3 min ago

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585745
Jan 10, 2013
 
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
No. It proves that a thing may exist even though you are not able to detect it.
As a matter of fact, reality is defined with such a concept in mind:
"In a wider definition, reality includes everything that is and has been, WHETHER OR NOT IT IS OBSERVABLE OR COMPREHENSIBLE." [wikipedia.com]
So unless you decide that whatever you cant see or feel or taste doesnt exist; you cannot say that God doesnt exist based on the fact that you have no evidence of His existence.
THE UNIVERSE MAY BE FULL OF THINGS THAT EXIST, FOR WHICH YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE (or maybe you can prove to me that you know everything and have proof of everything).
So the stance of no acceptance of existence without evidence is quite weak; logical but weak.
You can negate and refute till you are blue in the face; but since you are not that which created this reality, you cannot tell what doesnt exist in it.
All you can do is speculate like myself here.
But I will speculate about the positive aspects of things; I will speculate that God exists as opposed to speculating that He doesnt. You know why? BECAUSE WE LIVE IN A WORLD OF POSSIBILITIES; SUCH THAT EVEN THAT WHICH IS NOT, CAN BE CAUSED TO BECOME.
So anything could have happened; even God.
<quoted text>
That is superfluous to the discussion.
The tool will reflect its own responses to the reality and will not give a measurement of the reality itself; regardless of what came first- the chicken or the egg, the tool or the claim.
Furthermore, if the tool was invented before claims were made; then the inventors of the tools had no idea what they were making.
<quoted text>
I never claimed that God cannot be detected; I said the inability to detect a thing does not mean that thing does not exist.
Otherwise there is value in what you said in this last bit here.
But if a scientists can conclude that evolution is a fact/reality when evidence ONLY SUPPORTS it; I dont see why I cant claim that God is real and existent when I have evidence to support it.
You dont agree that my evidence of God is valid; but I dont agree that common genes are proof of common ancestry either.*shrug*

Russel's teapot is out there too.
Henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585746
Jan 10, 2013
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible contains historical information from many centuries and many countries had been authored by man.
Time after time, when the Bible mentions a person, place, nation, language, or custom, it has been proven to be correct. More than one historian has come to Christ by studying the accuracy of the history revealed in the Bible. If it is so amazingly accurate about things we can verify, why would we doubt its accuracy about things we cannot verify?
The bible is full of fakes, errors and historical untruths!

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585747
Jan 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
"Theories are abstract and conceptual, and to this end they are always considered true. They are supported or challenged by observations in the world. They are 'rigorously tentative', meaning that they are PROPOSED AS TRUE and EXPECTED to satisfy careful examination to account for the possibility of faulty inference or incorrect observation. SOMETIMES THEORIES ARE INCORRECT, meaning that an explicit set of observations contradicts some fundamental objection or application of the theory, but more often THEORIES ARE CORRECTED TO CONFORM TO NEW OBSERVATIONS, by restricting the class of phenomena the theory applies to or changing the assertions made." [wikipedia.com]
SO not only do scientists ASSUME that the theory is true; they sometimes TWEAK it to make it better reflect reality.
So how come when I accept that the existence of God is true in order to begin learning about Him; you have a problem?
Dont you find the idea of tweaking scientific theory to match reality to constitute intellectual dishonesty?
If what they say is so accurate and scientific; what relevance is there is adding and removing, cutting and pasting?
You need a real hard, long, fat, stiff... drink... in your stomach... so you can relax... and unwind.
You don't know the difference between theory and hypothesis.
Henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585748
Jan 10, 2013
 
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
So let me get this straight; YOU EVIDENCE IS NO EVIDENCE?
Are you using the lack of evidence as evidence in and of itself?
The polite way to refute that claim would be to say "that is the fallacy of argumentum ignorantiam; i.e. arguing from ignorance. You cant say that a thing does not exist because there is no evidence for it."
But I'm not going to go the polite way because I know you know better; YOU ARE A SMART GIRL.
I'm just going to call you a "POOPY HEAD".
<quoted text>
For your information, there was a time when nothing existed; and look what we have here today.
Where were trees and rocks and brains and minds and imaginations before the universe was formed?
They never existed.
So to believe in the possibility of the existence of whatever I imagine does not constitute insanity.
The belief that any thing is possible reflects a mind that is in harmony with the nature of a reality; a reality where things came into existence after just a Big-Bang.
<quoted text>
You obviously have an obsession with death that only God can help you with.
<quoted text>
We are DEATH DEFIERS, its as simple as that. We rebel against death and decay with an ever renewed/increasing will to live.
We look for possibilities of survival even in places where titanium would disintegrate.
My faith supports my will to live, but I wouldnt say that it drives it.
Have you read the Bible?
Jesu(s) said "greater love has no man than this: that he should give his life for a brother/friend".
Those are hardly the words of someone who fears death or encourages the fear of death.
Your obsession with death is however demonstrative of sever depression.
I hope you dont kill yourself before I get to... date you ;)
There is no god. The bible is full of lies!
Pat

Granby, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585749
Jan 10, 2013
 
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
Garbage.
What enabled us to create machines to help us gather effectively, is our knowledge; so the limitations of the machines reflect our own limitations and the limitations of our knowledge.
So technically, machines dont help us to overcome our limitations; machines help us to re-define our limits.
Logic is by far the most reliable and effective equipment in our arsenal. Logic has always bee and always will be our main potential that we use to navigate and evaluate reality.
It is logic that enables us to interpret, evaluate, plan, design and construct. Nothing makes any sense without logic, because it is was a Logical Influence which created reality.
<quoted text>
You cannot conclude that there is no knowledge for any gods. By saying "gods" you have identified a specific entity/entities which have attributes and specific characteristics which are known (else how would you describe what a god is or is not?).
All you can say is that you dont believe the knowledge for gods that you have been offered.
Moreover, knowledge entails both what is known and not known.
So if you dont believe there is knowledge for God, then you cant believe your own conclusions either; because your conclusions were formed with respect to what you dont know of God.
P.S. Could you at least send me a pic?
"Garbage.
What enabled us to create machines to help us gather effectively, is our knowledge"

Where did I claime we had zero knowledge prior to building the machine? Please, get some help.

"Logic is by far the most reliable and effective equipment in our arsenal. Logic has always bee and always will be our main potential that we use to navigate and evaluate reality."

I very good argument to reject blind ignorant faith.

"All you can say is that you dont believe the knowledge for gods that you have been offered."

Rather all you can say is that you have offered knowledge when in fact you have offered nothing but an argument from ignorance and dogma. Your god = your ignorance, nothing more.

Why don't we disagree on the existence of anything OTHER than god? Hmmm DEATH DENIER? LOL

"You cannot conclude that there is no knowledge for any gods."

But I can conclude that no person has ever found it and offered it to the public. Read this very carefully - If knowledge of god existed, the existence of god would be a matter of fact not a lmatter of faith. Even most theists are more honest than you and will admit their belief requires faith.

"Moreover, knowledge entails both what is known and not known."

True, and to base a belief on what is not known is irrational because what you don;t know is your IGNORANCE. Your god = your ignorance.

"So if you dont believe there is knowledge for God, then you cant believe your own conclusions either; because your conclusions were formed with respect to what you dont know of God."

There is no KNOWN knowledge for any god. How's that? I have no conclusions about god because there is NO KNOWLEDGE to base any conclusions on.

"P.S. Could you at least send me a pic?"

Just pray for one and see what you get! LOL
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585750
Jan 10, 2013
 
Pat wrote:
<quoted text>
...But you do not claim a god might exist you claim he DOES exist. You are a dishonest morally challenged fool. How old are you?
Scientists assume a theory to be true before they test it; but you dont let that bother you do you?

But as soon as I make a suggestion on the nature of God your hounding at my balls.

If I cant claim that God does exist; no-one can claim that God DOES NOT EXIST.

Do you think a negative stance is more logical than a positive one?

What are you more likely to find; evidence that something exists or evidence that something does not exist?

How many negatives has science proven?
Pat wrote:
... Depends on how you word it professor. Predicting you will win the lottery prior to the drawing is not the same as claiming you have won the lottery prior to the drawing. One is a lie, can you tell which one? LOL You prove Koestler right with every post with your specious rationalizations!
That makes no sense.

Whatever will happen has already happened (I dare you to prove otherwise).

If I know that I will win, I can claim that I will win. Thats prediction for ya.
Pat wrote:
...So that's why every primitive human culture on planet earth clings to foolish religious superstitions about gods, right? Stop projecting your stupid onto me you disengenous jackass.
You sound so sexy when you cuss.

I'm 25 by the way. How old are you?
Pat

Granby, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585751
Jan 10, 2013
 
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
I am positive about God because I have seen and experienced His Influence personally and among others; I dont beleive in God because it makes me feel good about myself.
You are the one confused and confusing.
You keep confusing me with someone who just jumped up and believe the words of some old book, or who just hung on the word of some preacher guy bellowing from some pulpit.
You keep talking about all kinda things from bulldozers to bullshit.
Do bulldozers and telescopes really help us to overcome our limits; or do they only redefine them?
To truly remove or decrease your limits, you should learn to rely less on strength and sight; not create things based on the limits of your strength and sight.
Who is limited; the one who requires that a 3 ton structure be moved, or the one who does not have to lift a straw?
"I am positive about God because I have seen and experienced His Influence personally and among others; I dont beleive in God because it makes me feel good about myself."

How is believing an invisible man in the sky is personally toying with you any different than believing there is an invisible man living under bed toying with you?

You beleive in god for the same reason all do, to avoid facing your mortality honestly.

"Do bulldozers and telescopes really help us to overcome our limits; or do they only redefine them?"

They expand both our knowledge and our limits.

We have already compared the benefits of theology and science. When the theologian governed the world, it was covered with huts and hovels for the many, palaces and cathedrals for the few. To nearly all the children of men, reading and writing were unknown arts. The poor were clad in rags and skins -- they devoured crusts, and gnawed bones. The day of Science dawned, and the luxuries of a century ago are the necessities of to-day. Men in the middle ranks of life have more of the conveniences and elegancies than the princes and kings of the theological times. But above and over all this, is the development of mind. There is more of value in the brain of an average man of to-day -- of a master-mechanic, of a chemist, of a naturalist, of an inventor, than there was in the brain of the world four hundred years ago.
These blessings did not fall from the skies. These benefits did not drop from the outstretched hands of priests. They were not found in cathedrals or behind altars -- neither were they searched for with holy candles. They were not discovered by the closed eyes of prayer, nor did they come in answer to superstitious supplication. They are the children of freedom, the gifts of reason, observation and experience -- and for them all, man is indebted to man.
-- Robert Green Ingersoll, "God In The Constitution"
Henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585752
Jan 10, 2013
 
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't see evidence of that except from religions like yours. Your church has been waging a war against science since it first met it, and a war against reason in general since its inception.
<quoted text>
You're wrong about that. Your bible is the only possible source of evidence that if a creator god exists, it's Jehovah.
But more importantly, your god is said to be the author of the bible, making it an autobiography of sorts. It describes a perfect god that knows all, can do all, and that loves us perfectly.
Sorry. No such god exists. No god that writes about itself being perfect, and then proceeds to write a bible full of self-contradiction, failed prophecy, unfulfilled promises, and errors of scientific and historical fact could exist.
<quoted text>
If there is a god, it's not the Christian god, so I won't worship at that altar.
The bible is very often a fairy tale, but one have to be very critical about it.
Forum carlsbad nm

Hobbs, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585753
Jan 10, 2013
 
Jennifer Lopez is rocking the cradle.
Child abuse?
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585754
Jan 10, 2013
 
Henry wrote:
<quoted text>
Unfortunately, there was never and there is never the fainest idea of any god or the Spaghetti monster or any other myths!
So if there are no such things nor even the faintest idea, how do you know what you are talking about?

A non-existent cannot be rationally described nor logically represented, for the simple fact that it has no prperties to describe or represent.

So how do you know that the entities with which specific attributes are associated, dont exist?

I face a dilemma in situation like this:

I can either conclude that you are a blabbering fool who just wants to troll; or I can conclude that you are a blabbering fool who just hates God.

Choices choices.
Pat

Granby, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585755
Jan 10, 2013
 
God Himself wrote:
You have a nasty habit of talking gibberish when you have nothing to resist or retort with.
<quoted text>
I guess its not contradictory. I see that now.
But if the limits you were born with prevent you from detecting light; how do you know that the light existed?
Was the existence of the light not made through logic and reasoning?
Were logic and reasoning not the influences that guided to creation of any tools to test or measure that light which is undetectable by the human senses?
And since we create devices from our knowledge; will the devices not reflect our limits and the limits of our knowledge?
Whether your statement was contradictory or not does not affect the validity of my claim that all you know is the processes that are occurring inside your body.
Your claim to know of an objective reality (especially "beyond human ability") is quite... naive and absurd.
<quoted text>
That limitation is automatically implied.
We are creatures of limited potentials and limited knowledge; who use that limited potential and knowledge to create things that are limited in their potentials.
<quoted text>
There that gibberish thing goes again.
As soon as you figure out what you mean by that; let me know so I can figure it out too.
"But if the limits you were born with prevent you from detecting light; how do you know that the light existed?"

You use your intellect to create a tool that do the job for you to see if they exist. You have a nasty habit of talking gibberish when you have nothing to resist or retort with.

"Was the existence of the light not made through logic and reasoning?"

The existence of light has nothing at all to do with your discovery or acceptance of it, if it exists it exists. You have a nasty habit of talking gibberish when you have nothing to resist or retort with.

"And since we create devices from our knowledge; will the devices not reflect our limits and the limits of our knowledge?"

Duh

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585756
Jan 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm 25 by the way. How old are you?
Boy, was I ever wrong.

I figured you were either 15, or in your 80s.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585757
Jan 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Catcher1 wrote:
Never any god!
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585758
Jan 10, 2013
 
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Boy, was I ever wrong.
I figured you were either 15, or in your 80s.
Ya...no concept of scientific hypothesis/theory/law.
Pat

Granby, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585759
Jan 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
So let me get this straight; YOU EVIDENCE IS NO EVIDENCE?
Are you using the lack of evidence as evidence in and of itself?
The polite way to refute that claim would be to say "that is the fallacy of argumentum ignorantiam; i.e. arguing from ignorance. You cant say that a thing does not exist because there is no evidence for it."
But I'm not going to go the polite way because I know you know better; YOU ARE A SMART GIRL.
I'm just going to call you a "POOPY HEAD".
<quoted text>
For your information, there was a time when nothing existed; and look what we have here today.
Where were trees and rocks and brains and minds and imaginations before the universe was formed?
They never existed.
So to believe in the possibility of the existence of whatever I imagine does not constitute insanity.
The belief that any thing is possible reflects a mind that is in harmony with the nature of a reality; a reality where things came into existence after just a Big-Bang.
<quoted text>
You obviously have an obsession with death that only God can help you with.
<quoted text>
We are DEATH DEFIERS, its as simple as that. We rebel against death and decay with an ever renewed/increasing will to live.
We look for possibilities of survival even in places where titanium would disintegrate.
My faith supports my will to live, but I wouldnt say that it drives it.
Have you read the Bible?
Jesu(s) said "greater love has no man than this: that he should give his life for a brother/friend".
Those are hardly the words of someone who fears death or encourages the fear of death.
Your obsession with death is however demonstrative of sever depression.
I hope you dont kill yourself before I get to... date you ;)
"So let me get this straight; YOU EVIDENCE IS NO EVIDENCE?"

That is correct. If you are going to make a fantastical claim that you have invented an anti gravity machine then the burden is on you to prove it and if you offer no evidence to prove it I am justified in rejecting your claim so until YOU offer proof for your claim, the lack of evidence you provide speaks for itself.

"You cant say that a thing does not exist because there is no evidence for it."

When I claim god does not exist you can offer this argument, until then you are simply proving yourself to be a complete idiot.

"For your information, there was a time when nothing existed; and look what we have here today."

More unsubstantiated bs. You have no knowledge that there was once "nothing" so again you dishonest dunce you can stop lying now.

"The belief that any thing is possible reflects a mind that is in harmony with the nature of a reality;"

The belief that anything is possible is a baseless belief for we do not know that anything is possible. People who hold such a belief do nothing other than prove they can not make any distinction between fantasy and reality.

"Have you read the Bible?"

Yes, have you read the National Enquirer?

"Your obsession with death is however demonstrative of sever depression."

I am not obsessed with death and can face it honestly. You on the other hand have created an entire fantasy based world view around your death denial nonsense so if anybody is obsessed with death it is you.

"I hope you dont kill yourself before I get to... date you"

Are these your christian values shining through? I really do prick your conscience don't I? Good.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585760
Jan 10, 2013
 
Pat wrote:
<quoted text>
Intelligent design is an argument from ignorance, not knowledge. It is equal to: Lookie here Jethro, ain't life complex? There must be a god! It's pure ignorance.
It is not the mere complexity of life that leads us to the conclusion my dear Patti Cake.

Its the fact that all this complexity works, that leads us to believe there is an intelligent influence involved.

And it cannot be an argument from ignorance because we do have evidence to support the claim.
Pat wrote:
"HOW COULD LIFE EMERGE SINCE DEATH IS SO SUPERIOR TO LIFE (you sound as if you embrace and glorify death)?"
I do not know exactly how life came to be and neither do you so you can stop pretending you do and admit to not knowing like an HONEST PERSON.
After you tell that to your scientific thinking fellow on here, you can come back to tell me.

They dont seem to share your sentiments.
Pat wrote:
...The present day result of the evolutionary process on earth has resulted in being you call intelligent. This does not imply that the initial chemical reactions or what ever it was that started the process of life on earth was caused by some kind of intelligence.
Uuuuuuuuuuh, yeah it kinda does.

Have you ever seen intelligence emerge by accident?

For intelligence and efficiency to emerge from blind mindless forces is like throwing some paint on a canvas and expecting a "Madonna" or to show up perfectly painted.

I will show you something:

When scientists first saw a figure on Mars that looked like a face, what did they assume: did they assume it was made by other beings or that it evolves into existence?

THE PERSON WHO THINKS THAT INTELLIGENCE EMERGED FROM NOTHING OR MINDLESS PROCESSES ALONE, CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO BE INTELLIGENT.
Pat wrote:
WE DO NOT KNOW. YOUR GOD IS YOUR IGNORANCE.
...
Man goes into the ground and rots after he dies. Explain to me how life after death is different from death if you lack the ability to experience it. We know that awareness requires working senses and a brain to process the information so if you lack awareness to experience it there is no point to any afterlife...
I dint say nor suggest that one lacks the ability to experience the life that comes after death; I suggested the nature of experiences may be different from the ones we have in this present state.

The nature of the experiences in the after-life may be such that memory is redundant/unnecessary.
Pat wrote:
The ASSUMING jackass is you who assumes you are going somehwere after death. Stop attributing your stupid onto me.
"I could tell you what you are open for, but you would probably report me to the forum moderator."
I have thick skin, give it a go.
You assume that life ends in death, which makes you an even bigger jackass; because that which is truly alive is never subject to death.

That which is truly alive will never die; thats what makes it lively.

I presume you will say there is no such that as a thing that cannot die; but I will point out to you that matter-energy cannot be created nor destroyed...

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585761
Jan 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Boy, was I ever wrong.
I figured you were either 15, or in your 80s.
That's still way too young , you know catcher some are barely scooted out from under mommy's apron at 25. They also have more testosterone than brains at that age. But this one must have been raised up by Westboro or something.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585762
Jan 10, 2013
 
Pat wrote:
<quoted text>
...That is false and having two words that mean teh very same things serves no functional purpose in the language. Faith may be a belief but it is an irrational belief as it relates to a god. Beliefs can also be rational and based upon knowledge...
"You dont need religion to believe in a thing, but faith is the belief of a thing (that it is x)."
Religious faith is a belief that lacks proof and to admit your belief requires faith is to admit that your belief can not stand on its own merits. In other words it's crap.
Did you like totally dodge English language class?

You obviously have never heard of "synonyms".

Faith is a belief like all other beliefs.

And the value of any belief is determined by its consistency with reality.

So as long as my faith is consistent with what I experience, then my faith is no less valid than the confidence a scientist places in a concept, theory or fact :P
God Himself

Germany

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585763
Jan 10, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Pat wrote:
<quoted text>
"So let me get this straight; YOU EVIDENCE IS NO EVIDENCE?"
That is correct. If you are going to make a fantastical claim that you have invented an anti gravity machine then the burden is on you to prove it and if you offer no evidence to prove it I am justified in rejecting your claim so until YOU offer proof for your claim, the lack of evidence you provide speaks for itself.
"You cant say that a thing does not exist because there is no evidence for it."
When I claim god does not exist you can offer this argument, until then you are simply proving yourself to be a complete idiot.
"For your information, there was a time when nothing existed; and look what we have here today."
More unsubstantiated bs. You have no knowledge that there was once "nothing" so again you dishonest dunce you can stop lying now.
"The belief that any thing is possible reflects a mind that is in harmony with the nature of a reality;"
The belief that anything is possible is a baseless belief for we do not know that anything is possible. People who hold such a belief do nothing other than prove they can not make any distinction between fantasy and reality.
"Have you read the Bible?"
Yes, have you read the National Enquirer?
"Your obsession with death is however demonstrative of sever depression."
I am not obsessed with death and can face it honestly. You on the other hand have created an entire fantasy based world view around your death denial nonsense so if anybody is obsessed with death it is you.
"I hope you dont kill yourself before I get to... date you"
Are these your christian values shining through? I really do prick your conscience don't I? Good.
I fart up your nose.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#585764
Jan 10, 2013
 
Mylan wrote:
<quoted text>
And cars have insurance. Thank you for proving our point.
Because cars are more dangerous and more valuable.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

370 Users are viewing the Top Stories Forum right now

Search the Top Stories Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
is it wrong i like to wear womens underwear (Nov '12) 5 min andet1987 160
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 7 min shyam 4,480
Last Word + 2 10 min andet1987 22
ye olde village pub (Jun '07) 11 min Ruby88 53,159
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 35 min marge 532,440
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 44 min Catcher1 172,267
skype sex id luv to try it (Aug '13) 49 min bryan 50
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr Insults Are Easier 256,381
Game of Thrones Ebook Download Free [PDF] (Feb '13) 8 hr John 53
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••