billvon 3,125 #1 September 23, 2003 A fossilized skull was recently unearthed in Romania. It's 36,000 years old and is primarily Cro-Magnon in appearance but bears some marks of a Neanderthal skull. Researchers think this may indicate that Cro-Magnon and Neanderthals may have interbred after they split off as two subspecies. Story here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #2 September 23, 2003 Wasnt there already a skull like that found a year or so ago? I seem to remember a Discovery show on that....Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Blahr 0 #3 September 23, 2003 QuoteA fossilized skull was recently unearthed in Romania. It's 36,000 years old and is primarily Cro-Magnon in appearance but bears some marks of a Neanderthal skull. Researchers think this may indicate that Cro-Magnon and Neanderthals may have interbred after they split off as two subspecies. Story Story [url "http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/09/23/caveman.romania.reut/index.html"> here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #4 September 23, 2003 Somewhere along the line, there must have been that division between the monkeys that became people and the monkeys that remained monkeys. I am sure that there was a humanoid-type bringing a date home to meet the folks... "Uhhh... yeah those are my grandparents over there... gramps, could you stop flinging poo for a sec, I want to introduce you to Doris..." At a family reunion, "Some of the cousins didn't come this year, the opposable-thumb issue at dinner time was bugging them..." "That side of the family tree still lives in the family tree..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites QuickDraw 0 #5 September 23, 2003 Quote"They are all dirty and smelly and all that sort of stuff. The basic facial shape would have been like ours but from the cheeks on down they would have looked very large." I can point out some living specimens, alive and well and drinking in the town where i live. -- Hope you don't die. -- I'm fucking winning Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skreamer 1 #6 September 23, 2003 QuoteIt's 36,000 years old and is primarily Cro-Magnon in appearance but bears some marks of a Neanderthal skull. Wow, lose three zeros and that could be Remster's skull! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Remster 30 #7 September 23, 2003 4000 years off, if you forget the zeros again....Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PLFKING 4 #8 September 23, 2003 QuoteWow, lose three zeros and that could be Remster's skull! I always thought Remi's first action as a Greenie would have been to obliterate your a**......I can't believe he isn't abusing his power. Don Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Remster 30 #9 September 23, 2003 It just shows how mature and wise I am to not over-react to such adolecent ramblings.... That, and that I can only ban him if he posts in the French forum.... here Skreamer Skreamer Skreamer.... come talk to us in french....Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Deuce 1 #10 September 23, 2003 Does DNA allow for evolution? Is there a set of traights in our DNA that allow us to be neanderthal or cro-magnon? This was the subject of one of the most interesting books I've read on the creation/evolution debate. Even though I'm white and 6', I have the genetic potential to be black, and 5'. There is no indication that humans possess the genetic map of gills. The argument being that a human may be born with flippers, but not necessarily because it's parent lived it's whole life in water. It's a mutation, not an evolution. It seems the whole debate has quieted down a lot since the human genome was mapped. I really suspect that is where the answers to our origins will be found. In our own living DNA, not the fossil record. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #11 September 23, 2003 QuoteEven though I'm white and 6', I have the genetic potential to be black, and 5'. You're Michael Jackson? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Michele 1 #12 September 23, 2003 QuoteYou're Michael Jackson? Nah, Deucy has a nose. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skreamer 1 #13 September 23, 2003 QuoteI always thought Remi's first action as a Greenie would have been to obliterate your a**......I can't believe he isn't abusing his power. Dude, Remi is French Canadian - he wants to do a lot of things to my ass but obliterate it isn't one of them... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,125 #14 September 23, 2003 >Does DNA allow for evolution? Well, sure. You can rapidly "evolve" fruit flies by killing off all the ones with red eyes, or black eyes or whatever, and the survivor's DNA expresses the selected trait. > Is there a set of traights in our DNA that allow us to be >neanderthal or cro-magnon? Well, it's probably a good guess that some of the traits are there, but inactive. DNA is incredibly complex, and part of our genetic code controls what other parts are expressed. Some are time delayed (development of secondary sexual characteristics for example) others are activated only under certain situations (melanin production when exposed to sunlight.) When evolution drives us to lose a feature (like a tail) generally the most straightforward way to do that is to just never activate the genes that express for tail formation. The information to _make_ the tail stays there, it's just not activated. Over time that information can degrade because there's no method to "fix" it anymore if it becomes corrupted. In other words if you tried to reactivate those genes it's anybody's guess as to whether you'd get a working tail, a vestigial thing or spina bifida. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Deuce 1 #15 September 23, 2003 QuoteWell, sure. You can rapidly "evolve" fruit flies by killing off all the ones with red eyes, or black eyes or whatever, and the survivor's DNA expresses the selected trait. As I understand that, Bill, that's selection, not evolution. Like the moths outside London during the industrial revolution who began to stand out and get eaten by birds as the trunks of the trees were darekned by soot. There was always dark moths, but until the environment changed, they got eaten more. I understand evolution to be something NEW in a species. Like fruit flies developing a different kind of eye entirely due to environmental pressure. It does seem likely that the genetic code of a species might "clip out" unused or corrupted genes. It just seems to me that when we find out what all those genes do, in the multitude of combinations that are available, we'll get a better glimpse of species origin. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,125 #16 September 23, 2003 >As I understand that, Bill, that's selection, not evolution. Yes, which is why I put evolution in quotes. It takes a tremendous amount of time for truly new functional features to develop, since you need essentially a series of happy accidents to create one new organism with the new trait - which then has such a huge advantage over other animals that it succeeds where they fail. Selection is sort of evolution lite, although you can _still_ see the results in the organism's genome. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 226 #17 September 23, 2003 QuoteDoes DNA allow for evolution? Is there a set of traights in our DNA that allow us to be neanderthal or cro-magnon? This was the subject of one of the most interesting books I've read on the creation/evolution debate. Even though I'm white and 6', I have the genetic potential to be black, and 5'. There is no indication that humans possess the genetic map of gills. The argument being that a human may be born with flippers, but not necessarily because it's parent lived it's whole life in water. It's a mutation, not an evolution. It seems the whole debate has quieted down a lot since the human genome was mapped. I really suspect that is where the answers to our origins will be found. In our own living DNA, not the fossil record. Ok, but would it not make sense that evolution is only a series of mutations that worked, well, at least well enough to allow for further mutation that works...and so on?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #18 September 23, 2003 Quote...and is primarily Cro-Magnon in appearance but bears some marks of a Neanderthal skull. ...her recent appearance at the Debutante Ball, the daughter of Stephanie Cro and Eric Magnon was stunning in her leopard skin print. Her uncle on her mothers side, the philanthropist Mark Neanderthal, danced with her in the first traditional first dance of the evening. He remarked that "He hoped no one would burn themselves this year. The invention of fire has been such a hazard." l Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vonSanta 0 #19 September 23, 2003 Well technically speaking IIRC evolution is loosely defined in 'change of allele frequency in a population over time'. Alleles can be said to be genotypes or variants on a gene. For the moth example there's a good document here. Evolution is directionless. Changes that are not beneficial to a species just tend to be removed through 'natural selection' - or rather the failure to propogate those specific traits - usually because of a failure to reproduce. Evolution is not an easy topic to discuss - often there are conflicts between new discoveries and Darwin's original idea. Darwin though environmental changes could trigger evolution - nowadays it is thought that this isn't so; the new environments just weed out amongst the existing alleles'. The human genome project is a huge advancement, also for the science of evolution. We need however also to look at other species to 'compare notes' and whatnot - to find out what those dormant genes we carry might have done. Santa Von GrossenArsch I only come in one flavour ohwaitthatcanbemisunderst Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites QuickDraw 0 #20 September 23, 2003 Dude you been on the 'Angels Trumpet' t-bags today ? -- Hope you don't die. -- I'm fucking winning Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Deuce 1 #21 September 23, 2003 QuoteSelection is sort of evolution lite Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
happythoughts 0 #4 September 23, 2003 Somewhere along the line, there must have been that division between the monkeys that became people and the monkeys that remained monkeys. I am sure that there was a humanoid-type bringing a date home to meet the folks... "Uhhh... yeah those are my grandparents over there... gramps, could you stop flinging poo for a sec, I want to introduce you to Doris..." At a family reunion, "Some of the cousins didn't come this year, the opposable-thumb issue at dinner time was bugging them..." "That side of the family tree still lives in the family tree..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites QuickDraw 0 #5 September 23, 2003 Quote"They are all dirty and smelly and all that sort of stuff. The basic facial shape would have been like ours but from the cheeks on down they would have looked very large." I can point out some living specimens, alive and well and drinking in the town where i live. -- Hope you don't die. -- I'm fucking winning Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skreamer 1 #6 September 23, 2003 QuoteIt's 36,000 years old and is primarily Cro-Magnon in appearance but bears some marks of a Neanderthal skull. Wow, lose three zeros and that could be Remster's skull! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Remster 30 #7 September 23, 2003 4000 years off, if you forget the zeros again....Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PLFKING 4 #8 September 23, 2003 QuoteWow, lose three zeros and that could be Remster's skull! I always thought Remi's first action as a Greenie would have been to obliterate your a**......I can't believe he isn't abusing his power. Don Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Remster 30 #9 September 23, 2003 It just shows how mature and wise I am to not over-react to such adolecent ramblings.... That, and that I can only ban him if he posts in the French forum.... here Skreamer Skreamer Skreamer.... come talk to us in french....Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Deuce 1 #10 September 23, 2003 Does DNA allow for evolution? Is there a set of traights in our DNA that allow us to be neanderthal or cro-magnon? This was the subject of one of the most interesting books I've read on the creation/evolution debate. Even though I'm white and 6', I have the genetic potential to be black, and 5'. There is no indication that humans possess the genetic map of gills. The argument being that a human may be born with flippers, but not necessarily because it's parent lived it's whole life in water. It's a mutation, not an evolution. It seems the whole debate has quieted down a lot since the human genome was mapped. I really suspect that is where the answers to our origins will be found. In our own living DNA, not the fossil record. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #11 September 23, 2003 QuoteEven though I'm white and 6', I have the genetic potential to be black, and 5'. You're Michael Jackson? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Michele 1 #12 September 23, 2003 QuoteYou're Michael Jackson? Nah, Deucy has a nose. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skreamer 1 #13 September 23, 2003 QuoteI always thought Remi's first action as a Greenie would have been to obliterate your a**......I can't believe he isn't abusing his power. Dude, Remi is French Canadian - he wants to do a lot of things to my ass but obliterate it isn't one of them... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,125 #14 September 23, 2003 >Does DNA allow for evolution? Well, sure. You can rapidly "evolve" fruit flies by killing off all the ones with red eyes, or black eyes or whatever, and the survivor's DNA expresses the selected trait. > Is there a set of traights in our DNA that allow us to be >neanderthal or cro-magnon? Well, it's probably a good guess that some of the traits are there, but inactive. DNA is incredibly complex, and part of our genetic code controls what other parts are expressed. Some are time delayed (development of secondary sexual characteristics for example) others are activated only under certain situations (melanin production when exposed to sunlight.) When evolution drives us to lose a feature (like a tail) generally the most straightforward way to do that is to just never activate the genes that express for tail formation. The information to _make_ the tail stays there, it's just not activated. Over time that information can degrade because there's no method to "fix" it anymore if it becomes corrupted. In other words if you tried to reactivate those genes it's anybody's guess as to whether you'd get a working tail, a vestigial thing or spina bifida. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Deuce 1 #15 September 23, 2003 QuoteWell, sure. You can rapidly "evolve" fruit flies by killing off all the ones with red eyes, or black eyes or whatever, and the survivor's DNA expresses the selected trait. As I understand that, Bill, that's selection, not evolution. Like the moths outside London during the industrial revolution who began to stand out and get eaten by birds as the trunks of the trees were darekned by soot. There was always dark moths, but until the environment changed, they got eaten more. I understand evolution to be something NEW in a species. Like fruit flies developing a different kind of eye entirely due to environmental pressure. It does seem likely that the genetic code of a species might "clip out" unused or corrupted genes. It just seems to me that when we find out what all those genes do, in the multitude of combinations that are available, we'll get a better glimpse of species origin. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,125 #16 September 23, 2003 >As I understand that, Bill, that's selection, not evolution. Yes, which is why I put evolution in quotes. It takes a tremendous amount of time for truly new functional features to develop, since you need essentially a series of happy accidents to create one new organism with the new trait - which then has such a huge advantage over other animals that it succeeds where they fail. Selection is sort of evolution lite, although you can _still_ see the results in the organism's genome. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 226 #17 September 23, 2003 QuoteDoes DNA allow for evolution? Is there a set of traights in our DNA that allow us to be neanderthal or cro-magnon? This was the subject of one of the most interesting books I've read on the creation/evolution debate. Even though I'm white and 6', I have the genetic potential to be black, and 5'. There is no indication that humans possess the genetic map of gills. The argument being that a human may be born with flippers, but not necessarily because it's parent lived it's whole life in water. It's a mutation, not an evolution. It seems the whole debate has quieted down a lot since the human genome was mapped. I really suspect that is where the answers to our origins will be found. In our own living DNA, not the fossil record. Ok, but would it not make sense that evolution is only a series of mutations that worked, well, at least well enough to allow for further mutation that works...and so on?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #18 September 23, 2003 Quote...and is primarily Cro-Magnon in appearance but bears some marks of a Neanderthal skull. ...her recent appearance at the Debutante Ball, the daughter of Stephanie Cro and Eric Magnon was stunning in her leopard skin print. Her uncle on her mothers side, the philanthropist Mark Neanderthal, danced with her in the first traditional first dance of the evening. He remarked that "He hoped no one would burn themselves this year. The invention of fire has been such a hazard." l Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vonSanta 0 #19 September 23, 2003 Well technically speaking IIRC evolution is loosely defined in 'change of allele frequency in a population over time'. Alleles can be said to be genotypes or variants on a gene. For the moth example there's a good document here. Evolution is directionless. Changes that are not beneficial to a species just tend to be removed through 'natural selection' - or rather the failure to propogate those specific traits - usually because of a failure to reproduce. Evolution is not an easy topic to discuss - often there are conflicts between new discoveries and Darwin's original idea. Darwin though environmental changes could trigger evolution - nowadays it is thought that this isn't so; the new environments just weed out amongst the existing alleles'. The human genome project is a huge advancement, also for the science of evolution. We need however also to look at other species to 'compare notes' and whatnot - to find out what those dormant genes we carry might have done. Santa Von GrossenArsch I only come in one flavour ohwaitthatcanbemisunderst Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites QuickDraw 0 #20 September 23, 2003 Dude you been on the 'Angels Trumpet' t-bags today ? -- Hope you don't die. -- I'm fucking winning Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Deuce 1 #21 September 23, 2003 QuoteSelection is sort of evolution lite Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
QuickDraw 0 #5 September 23, 2003 Quote"They are all dirty and smelly and all that sort of stuff. The basic facial shape would have been like ours but from the cheeks on down they would have looked very large." I can point out some living specimens, alive and well and drinking in the town where i live. -- Hope you don't die. -- I'm fucking winning Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skreamer 1 #6 September 23, 2003 QuoteIt's 36,000 years old and is primarily Cro-Magnon in appearance but bears some marks of a Neanderthal skull. Wow, lose three zeros and that could be Remster's skull! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #7 September 23, 2003 4000 years off, if you forget the zeros again....Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFKING 4 #8 September 23, 2003 QuoteWow, lose three zeros and that could be Remster's skull! I always thought Remi's first action as a Greenie would have been to obliterate your a**......I can't believe he isn't abusing his power. Don Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #9 September 23, 2003 It just shows how mature and wise I am to not over-react to such adolecent ramblings.... That, and that I can only ban him if he posts in the French forum.... here Skreamer Skreamer Skreamer.... come talk to us in french....Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #10 September 23, 2003 Does DNA allow for evolution? Is there a set of traights in our DNA that allow us to be neanderthal or cro-magnon? This was the subject of one of the most interesting books I've read on the creation/evolution debate. Even though I'm white and 6', I have the genetic potential to be black, and 5'. There is no indication that humans possess the genetic map of gills. The argument being that a human may be born with flippers, but not necessarily because it's parent lived it's whole life in water. It's a mutation, not an evolution. It seems the whole debate has quieted down a lot since the human genome was mapped. I really suspect that is where the answers to our origins will be found. In our own living DNA, not the fossil record. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #11 September 23, 2003 QuoteEven though I'm white and 6', I have the genetic potential to be black, and 5'. You're Michael Jackson? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #12 September 23, 2003 QuoteYou're Michael Jackson? Nah, Deucy has a nose. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skreamer 1 #13 September 23, 2003 QuoteI always thought Remi's first action as a Greenie would have been to obliterate your a**......I can't believe he isn't abusing his power. Dude, Remi is French Canadian - he wants to do a lot of things to my ass but obliterate it isn't one of them... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,125 #14 September 23, 2003 >Does DNA allow for evolution? Well, sure. You can rapidly "evolve" fruit flies by killing off all the ones with red eyes, or black eyes or whatever, and the survivor's DNA expresses the selected trait. > Is there a set of traights in our DNA that allow us to be >neanderthal or cro-magnon? Well, it's probably a good guess that some of the traits are there, but inactive. DNA is incredibly complex, and part of our genetic code controls what other parts are expressed. Some are time delayed (development of secondary sexual characteristics for example) others are activated only under certain situations (melanin production when exposed to sunlight.) When evolution drives us to lose a feature (like a tail) generally the most straightforward way to do that is to just never activate the genes that express for tail formation. The information to _make_ the tail stays there, it's just not activated. Over time that information can degrade because there's no method to "fix" it anymore if it becomes corrupted. In other words if you tried to reactivate those genes it's anybody's guess as to whether you'd get a working tail, a vestigial thing or spina bifida. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #15 September 23, 2003 QuoteWell, sure. You can rapidly "evolve" fruit flies by killing off all the ones with red eyes, or black eyes or whatever, and the survivor's DNA expresses the selected trait. As I understand that, Bill, that's selection, not evolution. Like the moths outside London during the industrial revolution who began to stand out and get eaten by birds as the trunks of the trees were darekned by soot. There was always dark moths, but until the environment changed, they got eaten more. I understand evolution to be something NEW in a species. Like fruit flies developing a different kind of eye entirely due to environmental pressure. It does seem likely that the genetic code of a species might "clip out" unused or corrupted genes. It just seems to me that when we find out what all those genes do, in the multitude of combinations that are available, we'll get a better glimpse of species origin. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,125 #16 September 23, 2003 >As I understand that, Bill, that's selection, not evolution. Yes, which is why I put evolution in quotes. It takes a tremendous amount of time for truly new functional features to develop, since you need essentially a series of happy accidents to create one new organism with the new trait - which then has such a huge advantage over other animals that it succeeds where they fail. Selection is sort of evolution lite, although you can _still_ see the results in the organism's genome. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #17 September 23, 2003 QuoteDoes DNA allow for evolution? Is there a set of traights in our DNA that allow us to be neanderthal or cro-magnon? This was the subject of one of the most interesting books I've read on the creation/evolution debate. Even though I'm white and 6', I have the genetic potential to be black, and 5'. There is no indication that humans possess the genetic map of gills. The argument being that a human may be born with flippers, but not necessarily because it's parent lived it's whole life in water. It's a mutation, not an evolution. It seems the whole debate has quieted down a lot since the human genome was mapped. I really suspect that is where the answers to our origins will be found. In our own living DNA, not the fossil record. Ok, but would it not make sense that evolution is only a series of mutations that worked, well, at least well enough to allow for further mutation that works...and so on?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #18 September 23, 2003 Quote...and is primarily Cro-Magnon in appearance but bears some marks of a Neanderthal skull. ...her recent appearance at the Debutante Ball, the daughter of Stephanie Cro and Eric Magnon was stunning in her leopard skin print. Her uncle on her mothers side, the philanthropist Mark Neanderthal, danced with her in the first traditional first dance of the evening. He remarked that "He hoped no one would burn themselves this year. The invention of fire has been such a hazard." l Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vonSanta 0 #19 September 23, 2003 Well technically speaking IIRC evolution is loosely defined in 'change of allele frequency in a population over time'. Alleles can be said to be genotypes or variants on a gene. For the moth example there's a good document here. Evolution is directionless. Changes that are not beneficial to a species just tend to be removed through 'natural selection' - or rather the failure to propogate those specific traits - usually because of a failure to reproduce. Evolution is not an easy topic to discuss - often there are conflicts between new discoveries and Darwin's original idea. Darwin though environmental changes could trigger evolution - nowadays it is thought that this isn't so; the new environments just weed out amongst the existing alleles'. The human genome project is a huge advancement, also for the science of evolution. We need however also to look at other species to 'compare notes' and whatnot - to find out what those dormant genes we carry might have done. Santa Von GrossenArsch I only come in one flavour ohwaitthatcanbemisunderst Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
QuickDraw 0 #20 September 23, 2003 Dude you been on the 'Angels Trumpet' t-bags today ? -- Hope you don't die. -- I'm fucking winning Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #21 September 23, 2003 QuoteSelection is sort of evolution lite Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)