Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Religion > Christianity > Re: NO EVIDENCE
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 69 of 286 Topic 22090 of 22556
Post > Topic >>

Re: NO EVIDENCE

by DanielSan <danielsan1977@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > May 10, 2008 at 09:08 AM

Antares 531 wrote:
> On Fri, 02 May 2008 18:44:22 -0400, Christopher A. Lee
> <calee@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 02 May 2008 22:27:04 GMT, Antares 531
>> <gordonlrDELETE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 02 May 2008 06:46:35 -0700, DanielSan
>>> <danielsan1977@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Antares 531 wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 19:27:27 +0100, "Bill M" <wmech@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have asked numerous times for someone to provide any
>>>>>> objective verifiable evidence that any gods actually exist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No one has ever supplied it. Not even any god.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the logical conclusion is that no real gods exist except in peoples
over 
>>>>>> active imaginations. 
>>>>>>
>>>>> And, just how would you cope with it if someone did provide you with
>>>>> such empirical proof? You would no longer have any sovereign choice
as
>>>>> to believing in or not believing in God. You would be overwhelmed
and
>>>>> thus compelled to do God's will. You would no longer be anything
more
>>>>> than a mere puppet of God's. And, being a puppet isn't what God
wants
>>>>> you or any of us to develop into.
>>>> How do you know how we'd react to such empirical proof?  What leads
you 
>>>> to believe that we'd act in such a way?
>>>>
>>> My thinking is that not many persons with a rational mind would rebel
>>> against God if they were absolutely certain that He existed.
>> What a ****ing moron.
>>
> Are you trying to convince me that you would indeed rebell against God
> even if His existence could be empirically proven to you? Or, would
> you surrender your sovereign will and puppy up to Him?

For me, it would depend on if God had the same parameters as the Bible 
gives him.  If so, I would certainly rebel against such a mass killer.

-- 
****************************************************
*          DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226          *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I do not believe in God because I do not        *
*  believe in Mother Goose."                       *
*                          --Clarence Darrow, 1925 *
****************************************************
 




 286 Posts in Topic:
NO EVIDENCE
"Bill M" <wm  2008-04-27 19:27:27 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"SheBlewHimDidYouBlo  2008-04-27 19:38:23 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Just Visiting <nospam-  2008-04-27 23:54:39 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"SheBlewHimDidYouBlo  2008-04-27 21:05:03 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Just Visiting <nospam-  2008-04-27 21:18:11 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"SheBlewHimDidYouBlo  2008-04-27 21:59:02 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
dieHard <dieHard@[EMAI  2008-04-28 13:56:22 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
bob young <alaspectrum  2008-04-28 00:58:03 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Just Visiting <nospam-  2008-04-28 19:41:49 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
bob young <alaspectrum  2008-04-30 04:14:07 
Re: NO EVIDENCE FOR ANY "imaginary mythological deity"
"Pastor Frank"   2008-04-30 10:52:00 
Re: NO EVIDENCE FOR ANY "imaginary mythological deity"
bob young <alaspectrum  2008-04-30 21:59:05 
Re: NO EVIDENCE FOR ANY "imaginary mythological deity"
EskWIRED@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-05-28 18:07:10 
Re: NO EVIDENCE FOR ANY "imaginary mythological deity"
"Pastor Frank"   2008-05-30 07:59:12 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
dieHard <dieHard@[EMAI  2008-04-28 13:46:21 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Just Visiting <nospam-  2008-04-27 19:41:34 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"SheBlewHimDidYouBlo  2008-04-27 21:05:55 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
bob young <alaspectrum  2008-04-28 01:01:06 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Richo <m.richardson61@  2008-04-27 20:19:11 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-04-27 20:35:37 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-04-28 17:01:12 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
EskWIRED@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-05-13 14:51:19 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Adonis" <ze  2008-05-13 11:01:15 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-13 19:10:13 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Adonis" <ze  2008-05-14 11:29:29 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
EskWIRED@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-05-14 19:29:49 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Adonis" <ze  2008-05-15 00:36:16 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-15 05:50:29 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-16 13:34:01 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Adonis" <ze  2008-05-16 08:08:14 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Robibnikoff" &  2008-05-16 08:30:51 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Adonis" <ze  2008-05-16 08:43:21 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-16 18:02:51 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
bob young <alaspectrum  2008-04-28 05:03:01 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Risto Karttunen <tipsu  2008-04-28 07:19:26 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-04-28 17:30:17 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-04-29 14:18:36 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-04-29 17:09:03 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-04-30 08:31:26 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-04-30 20:17:16 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-01 06:52:45 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-01 13:33:56 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-01 13:45:37 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
DanielSan <danielsan19  2008-05-01 04:47:25 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-01 21:05:29 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
DanielSan <danielsan19  2008-05-01 19:38:12 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 17:23:40 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 17:22:35 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
DanielSan <danielsan19  2008-05-15 17:57:06 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-01 08:45:27 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-01 21:15:34 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-01 15:20:57 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 17:48:02 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
modematic <modematic@[  2008-05-05 00:04:25 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 17:21:59 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
modematic <modematic@[  2008-04-30 22:01:08 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"firefly" <f  2008-05-01 22:25:40 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
bob young <alaspectrum  2008-05-02 04:32:02 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-02 08:46:33 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-01 22:36:23 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
modematic <modematic@[  2008-05-02 04:31:47 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
gudloos@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-05-02 04:32:08 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-02 08:43:42 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
DanielSan <danielsan19  2008-05-02 06:46:35 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-02 22:27:04 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-02 18:44:22 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-10 09:04:36 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-10 10:38:54 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
DanielSan <danielsan19  2008-05-10 09:08:47 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Pastor Frank"   2008-05-12 06:10:30 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Fred Jones" &l  2008-05-12 11:52:01 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Adonis" <ze  2008-05-15 02:37:34 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Ben Goren <ben@[EMAIL   2008-05-12 12:16:33 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Ben Goren <ben@[EMAIL   2008-05-10 11:14:46 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-02 09:49:16 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-02 22:29:18 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Ben Goren <ben@[EMAIL   2008-05-02 07:55:27 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-02 22:42:32 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Free Lunch <lunch@[EMA  2008-05-02 17:52:43 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-02 18:55:49 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Ben Goren <ben@[EMAIL   2008-05-02 17:39:20 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
John W. Wells <djinn@[  2008-05-10 20:02:18 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-11 08:57:07 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Free Lunch <lunch@[EMA  2008-05-11 09:14:32 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
dieHard <dieHard@[EMAI  2008-05-11 14:45:16 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Ben Goren <ben@[EMAIL   2008-05-11 14:48:26 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Darrell Stec <darrell_  2008-05-11 20:40:34 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
bob young <alaspectrum  2008-05-02 20:05:07 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
panamfloyd@[EMAIL PROTECT  2008-05-02 16:29:08 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-02 22:12:00 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-03 09:06:06 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"John Smith" &l  2008-05-03 09:46:52 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-05 21:32:49 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-06 07:19:10 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-06 03:48:27 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-06 17:10:46 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-06 12:04:06 
freedom of religion is a Christian concept
monkfish <monkfish@[EM  2008-05-06 13:13:38 
Re: freedom of religion is a Christian concept
"John Smith" &l  2008-05-07 03:09:13 
How do you know that we are created equal?
monkfish <monkfish@[EM  2008-05-06 13:05:09 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Risto Karttunen <tipsu  2008-05-05 23:41:01 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-06 17:26:20 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Darrell Stec <darrell_  2008-05-06 21:31:39 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 20:08:35 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"John Smith" &l  2008-05-07 03:17:19 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-07 18:14:50 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-09 18:15:20 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Santolina chamaecyparissu  2008-05-06 19:49:26 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-07 20:56:59 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-08 09:29:11 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-07 21:18:21 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Darrell Stec <darrell_  2008-05-08 01:42:32 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-08 15:50:53 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-08 18:51:57 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 20:18:33 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-08 18:20:03 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-08 21:26:48 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-09 11:49:27 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
gudloos@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-05-09 03:04:18 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
gudloos@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-05-09 03:07:49 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-09 16:54:17 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-09 20:05:53 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Free Lunch <lunch@[EMA  2008-05-09 19:33:05 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-10 08:35:47 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-09 17:36:17 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-10 08:29:35 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-10 03:15:19 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-10 19:34:42 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-11 17:40:50 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Free Lunch <lunch@[EMA  2008-05-11 19:56:44 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 22:58:19 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-16 18:00:12 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"John Smith" &l  2008-05-12 01:32:27 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-11 21:22:57 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 20:53:22 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
DanielSan <danielsan19  2008-05-15 21:02:15 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-11 22:10:31 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"John Smith" &l  2008-05-12 06:55:31 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 23:07:59 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-12 17:40:02 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 23:13:44 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-12 13:52:49 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 23:16:44 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-12 16:31:36 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-12 21:55:33 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-13 11:47:35 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-13 09:51:40 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-13 19:07:35 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-13 13:20:44 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-14 13:13:36 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-14 18:03:46 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-15 05:54:40 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-16 21:40:37 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-15 11:46:42 
AQOTM Nomination Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-16 21:41:32 
Re: AQOTM Nomination Re: NO EVIDENCE
atheist@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-05-17 01:39:16 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-15 21:20:40 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
DanielSan <danielsan19  2008-05-15 21:23:23 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-15 23:47:26 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Virgil <Virgil@[EMAIL   2008-05-16 01:35:20 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-16 13:30:28 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-16 18:14:03 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"John Smith" &l  2008-05-17 05:06:13 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-18 15:15:49 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Darrell Stec <darrell_  2008-05-18 20:36:16 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-17 08:22:46 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-17 13:08:54 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-17 17:39:44 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-18 08:15:23 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
modematic <modematic@[  2008-05-17 18:50:06 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-18 22:57:49 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-19 08:50:53 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-19 16:50:11 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Darrell Stec <darrell_  2008-05-19 20:34:53 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-20 08:24:54 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Darrell Stec <darrell_  2008-05-20 04:21:38 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-21 00:45:27 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-19 18:24:20 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-20 21:22:57 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
gudloos@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-05-21 04:47:10 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-21 17:38:07 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"John Smith" &l  2008-05-22 03:08:27 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-22 12:21:56 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
hhyapster@[EMAIL PROTECTE  2008-05-21 23:25:28 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Darrell Stec <darrell_  2008-05-22 04:43:04 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
saint7peter@[EMAIL PROTEC  2008-05-22 01:58:01 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-22 12:25:53 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-22 20:13:17 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-23 16:28:26 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
asilentskeptic <asilen  2008-05-22 20:20:18 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-22 21:06:00 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
modematic <modematic@[  2008-05-22 23:37:41 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill <bil@[EMAIL PROTE  2008-05-23 15:47:31 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Tokay Pino Gris <tokay  2008-05-25 17:10:09 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-23 17:05:29 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-23 21:11:15 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-24 07:54:04 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Mark K. Bilbo"  2008-05-24 08:15:47 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-25 07:57:17 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-26 09:18:03 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-24 07:52:11 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-24 16:37:03 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Mark K. Bilbo"  2008-05-26 19:51:31 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-06-01 19:16:01 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-23 17:35:26 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
modematic <modematic@[  2008-05-23 19:50:24 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill <bil@[EMAIL PROTE  2008-05-25 11:12:59 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"John Smith" &l  2008-05-25 18:40:01 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-05-25 14:15:33 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Mark K. Bilbo"  2008-05-26 19:56:21 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Mark K. Bilbo"  2008-05-26 19:52:32 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-06-01 19:14:11 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-25 22:46:11 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"John Smith" &l  2008-05-26 17:21:19 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Mark K. Bilbo"  2008-05-26 19:57:54 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill <bil@[EMAIL PROTE  2008-05-27 11:39:10 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill <bil@[EMAIL PROTE  2008-05-27 11:44:34 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Mark K. Bilbo"  2008-05-28 18:06:17 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-29 21:32:14 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Mark K. Bilbo"  2008-05-30 13:29:04 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-30 21:49:09 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill <bil@[EMAIL PROTE  2008-05-27 11:51:27 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-06-01 23:39:37 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"John Smith" &l  2008-06-02 07:04:34 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"L. Raymond" &l  2008-06-02 09:03:39 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-06-04 21:57:01 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Risto Karttunen <tipsu  2008-05-03 00:42:35 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-03 20:13:17 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-03 20:38:37 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-04 09:17:46 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
modematic <modematic@[  2008-05-04 06:31:31 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-04 10:43:02 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-04 21:37:02 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-05 00:44:51 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-05 07:19:15 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
stoney <stoney@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 17:56:38 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Bill Bowden <wrongaddr  2008-05-05 16:16:38 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-05 19:34:19 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"thomas p." <  2008-05-06 07:16:17 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-10 20:36:15 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-10 21:52:12 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-11 08:23:17 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-11 09:30:48 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Free Lunch <lunch@[EMA  2008-05-11 08:36:46 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-11 09:38:59 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Free Lunch <lunch@[EMA  2008-05-11 09:52:07 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-11 16:27:03 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-11 17:39:53 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Ben Goren <ben@[EMAIL   2008-05-11 15:00:21 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-11 19:28:06 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Free Lunch <lunch@[EMA  2008-05-11 19:39:05 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Ben Goren <ben@[EMAIL   2008-05-12 08:14:53 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
DanielSan <danielsan19  2008-05-11 16:07:20 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Free Lunch <lunch@[EMA  2008-05-11 18:09:56 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-11 10:59:15 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
EskWIRED@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-05-13 14:48:13 
How did they know?
Antares 531 <gordonlrD  2008-05-13 15:13:10 
Re: How did they know?
Lars Eighner <usenet@[  2008-05-13 15:45:25 
Re: How did they know?
James <bireda@[EMAIL P  2008-05-26 14:53:13 
Re: How did they know?
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-26 15:42:51 
Re: How did they know?
duke <duckgumbo32@[EMA  2008-05-26 17:47:51 
Re: How did they know?
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-26 19:02:08 
Re: How did they know?
duke <duckgumbo32@[EMA  2008-05-27 06:45:23 
Re: How did they know?
Lars Eighner <usenet@[  2008-05-13 15:49:42 
Re: How did they know?
raven1 <quoththeraven@  2008-05-13 18:04:35 
Re: How did they know?
Uncle Vic <address@[EM  2008-05-13 22:51:58 
Re: How did they know?
John Locke <johnlocke9  2008-05-13 16:40:08 
Re: How did they know?
James <bireda@[EMAIL P  2008-05-26 15:09:53 
Re: How did they know?
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-26 15:38:01 
Re: How did they know?
John Baker <nunya@[EMA  2008-05-14 06:44:55 
Re: How did they know?
James <bireda@[EMAIL P  2008-05-26 15:22:23 
Re: How did they know?
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Claude_Hop  2008-05-14 08:28:42 
Re: How did they know?
James <bireda@[EMAIL P  2008-05-26 15:17:10 
Re: How did they know?
Kelsey Bjarnason <kbja  2008-05-13 21:08:03 
Re: How did they know?
James <bireda@[EMAIL P  2008-05-26 15:01:13 
Re: How did they know?
gudloos@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-05-14 01:59:31 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
EskWIRED@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-05-14 13:34:32 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Adonis" <ze  2008-05-14 10:24:13 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
EskWIRED@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-05-14 15:04:31 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
EskWIRED@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-05-14 15:05:58 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Christopher A. Lee <ca  2008-05-14 11:17:10 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
EskWIRED@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-05-14 19:35:15 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Adonis" <ze  2008-05-14 11:15:37 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
EskWIRED@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-05-14 19:30:58 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
"Adonis" <ze  2008-05-15 00:56:20 
Re: NO EVIDENCE
Kelsey Bjarnason <kbja  2008-05-14 16:45:03 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan13V112 Fri Jul 25 22:59:28 CDT 2008.