Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 4 Votes - 2.75 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-05-2011, 09:52 AM
 
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(26-05-2011 09:36 AM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  We really need to teach logic in primary schools. It would make a lot of this so much simpler, and up test scores drastically for the US.

Agree. Most of the theist arguments are based on either the limited power or the inability of the atheists/scientist to give natural explanations to phenomena we don't yet understand. They don't realize that your opponents inability or their limited powers are not the proof for your deity. Also, they normally commit hideous fallacies, like science can't explain original of life, therefore it is God who did it. They don't realize that the unless, you prove God did it, the logical answer is 'We don't know yet'. Big Grin
Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2011, 10:50 AM
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
As you are simply repeating the same arguments over and over, L (you don't mind if I call you L, do you?), I hope you don't mind if I entirely ignore those portions of your posts which are irrelevant and/or simple repeats of things which have already been refuted.

(25-05-2011 09:01 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  Microevolution is a proven fact. Macroevolution is not. That is a fact as well.

No.

(25-05-2011 09:01 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  you should educate yourself better.

http://www.earthage.org/EarthOldorYoung/..._flood.htm

You should educate yourself better.

You might try starting here.

(25-05-2011 09:01 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  A complex system is a system composed of interconnected parts that as a whole exhibit one or more properties (behavior among the possible properties) not obvious from the properties of the individual parts.

Thank you. Now, can you tell me where in that definition it says that the information must come from intelligent beings?

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  Please explain why.

I already did. Read my post.

(25-05-2011 09:01 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  
Quote:Have you ever heard the saying that a thousand monkeys on a thousand typewriters, typing for an infinite length of time, will eventually produce the complete works of William Shakespeare? If so, you should be able to understand precisely why entering random data into a computer can create code which compiles and runs correctly.

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t287-inf...-a-creator

It has been calculated that it would be statistically impossible to randomly type even the first 100 characters in Shakespeare's "Hamlet".

If the monkeys typed only in lower case, including the 27 spaces in the first 100 characters, the chances are 27100 (ie. one chance in 10143).

Do you understand what the word "infinite" means? If so, can you explain to me why you think that, given infinite opportunities to succeed, a random process could not generate a single success in a trial wherein it is attempting to generate Shakespeare's works, given that 10143 is less than infinity?

If not, what are you smoking, and where can I buy some?

(25-05-2011 09:01 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  <snip Karl Popper quote for brevity>

Tell me, L. You do realize that Karl Popper was a philosopher, right? As in, not a scientist?

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  can you read ?

No.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  The mathematical possibility of such a complex structure arising in a primordial "soup" through random chance was calculated by Sir Fred Hoyle to be one in 10 to the 30,000 power or in simple terms- statistically impossible.

The only statistically impossible events are those with a zero percent chance of occurring. Any event with a statistical probability greater than zero is not impossible.

Here. You don't even have to take my word for it. You can ask Doctor Math!

If you want to lecture someone on statistics, you might take the time to make sure that they don't know more about it than you do. At the very least, you might try to get a grasp of the very basics of the field.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  No, its not.

Yes, it is.

If life has a one in six quadrillion chance of forming on its own, and there are at least six quadrillion opportunities for it to form, then statistics dictates that it is likely that life will form at least once.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  If naturalistic molecules-to-human-life evolution were true, multibillions of links are required to bridge modern humans with the chemicals that once existed in the hypothetical “primitive soup”.

True.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  <snip for brevity> Research shows that at the lowest level this number is in the multimillions, producing an irreducible level of complexity that cannot be bridged by any known natural means.

"Irreducible complexity" has been long discarded by anyone with any understanding of science. It's not even hard to find the things which conclusively prove it false. They're even explained on YouTube.

The beginning to that section was broadly correct; there are recognized issues with each proposed scenario for abiogenesis. The thing which you are deliberately ignoring, however, is that none of these people say that abiogenesis is impossible. They simply don't know exactly how it happened. Their objections are to theoretical scenarios which might have led to abiogenesis, not to abiogenesis itself.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  And where is the empirical evidence ?

As most of these things have been, right in front of you. Denying its existence doesn't make it go away.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  And chance shall be ?

Shall be what?

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  If you insist on that, why do you participate at this topic ?

Why should I let idiocy slide simply because the speaker doesn't want anyone to point it out?

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  i have read Genesis. so what ?

So pretty much everything in there, short of the existence of humans, contradicts scientific fact.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  First Law of Information (LI1)

Information cannot originate in statistical processes. (Chance plus time cannot create information no matter how many chances or how much time is available.)
There is no known law of nature, no known process, and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter.

Funny that the only site I can find which talks about this so-called "first law of information" is AnswersInGenesis. You'd think that, this being an actual scientific law and all and totally not something that creationists have made up out of whole cloth, it would receive more press time.

Odd.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  Then i suppose you are able to present codified information, which arose naturally, without intelligence involved ? that would be a scientific sensation.

As you haven't given an actual definition of information, no, I can't. Get back to me when you have.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  its not the topic of this thread.

On the contrary. It is very much the topic of this thread, whether you like it or not.

You come in here demanding evidence supporting atheism, and claim that we haven't given any. In fact, we have already given you all the evidence necessary to establish atheism.

Because atheism is an ontologically negative claim, the only thing necessary to establish its truth is the negation of theism (which is ontologically positive). Every argument of yours that we have refuted, every fallacy which we have demonstrated, is evidence for atheism.

Of course, I've said this already, and you didn't understand it then, either, so I don't really know why I'm bothering to repeat myself.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  Beside this, there are no proofs in regard of Gods existence.

Then theism is falsified.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  And its the wrong question , to ask for proofs.

No, it isn't. It just isn't a question you like.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  The right question should be: how can we best explain our existence ?

And the answer is "not with theism", because theism has no supporting evidence. You might as well say that Lucky the Leprechaun is a better explanation for our existence.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  I don't think so.

Then you don't understand what the argument from popularity fallacy is. The number of people who believe it - even if they believe it so strongly that they'll die for it - has no bearing on the issue.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  There is a reason, why these people gave their life for this cause. Otherwise, they would have all fooled themself.

Yup.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  have you ever read the new testament ?

Yes. Do you understand what the bare assertion fallacy is?

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  Many atheists claim that atheism is the default position. In other words, they claim that when persons are born, they are naturally atheists

Straw man fallacy, red herring fallacy.

It may or may not be the case the people are born atheists, but that isn't what I'm arguing. Atheism is the default position. That is, it is the position which is ontologically negative.

You might want to make sure that you understand the argument being made before you attempt to refute it.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  Even if an atheist were to hold the position that atheism is the default position (which cannot be verified) what does that have to do with whether or not God exists? It is irrelevant to the issue.

Straw man fallacy again.

We do not argue that, because atheism is the default position, God does not exist. We are simply stating that, if you wish to falsify atheism, the burden of proof is on you.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  that is pure nonsense. All empirical experience shows that everything that begins to exist, has a cause.

Show me one thing that begins to exist. Then claim your Nobel.

Beyond the equivocation fallacy that I have just exposed (equivocating between coming into existence ex materia and coming into existence ex nihilo), this line of reasoning fails to take into account that everything we know about the universe only applies within the universe. You cannot make the claim that the universe required a cause, because you have no idea whether or not causality applies outside the universe - and, as I have previously mentioned, time does not exist outside the universe, so any causality that existed would have to be a very strange causality indeed.

And the argument from William Lane Craig which you presented following the above quoted statement is, as I have stated before, self-contradictory. Its conclusion violates its premises.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  that is a positive assertion, and needs positive evidence as well to back up the claim.

Again, look up the definition of ontologically negative and ontologically positive claims. Your argument is fallacious.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  the kalaam cosmological argument has not found a compelling rebuttal.

Except that it is self-contradictory and founded on bare assertion.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  evolution does not explain the origin of life

It does not purport to.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  the fine tuning of the universe

Which has not been proven to exist.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  and the origin of the universe itself.

It does not purport to.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  you are exposed to my ideas. to the ideas of theists. at the very moment, you take posistion to that information, and deny it, you become a strong atheist.

No, you don't.

When you reject theism, you become an atheist. You do not necessarily become a strong atheist.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  where did i make the claim , that :

nothing moves without a prior mover ?

please do not put words in my mouth.

When you quoted William Lane Craig's version of the Kalam cosmological argument. "Out of nothing, nothing comes", remember? You might at least try to keep your own arguments straight.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  because all scientific evidence goes clearly against that claim.

On the contrary. All evidence supports that claim.

The space-time continuum, and everything within it, is the universe. That means that no time exists outside the universe (no time exists outside of time). That means that, for the only definition of "forever" which has any meaning, the universe has existed forever. It's just that "forever" is finite.

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  I rather say wars are the consequence of sin, not because we have needs. Otherwise, we would be always i a state of war somehow.

Have you ever read a history book?

(25-05-2011 03:15 PM)ElShadai Wrote:  Like a enciclopedia britannica ? can you imagine that it created itself through constant revisions becoming more and more complex ?

It did.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2011, 10:58 AM
 
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(26-05-2011 05:40 AM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  You've read one book by him that was not discussing his field of research. I offered to read without bringing along a bias any book you suggested if you would read this book. Why not just try to read a second book by someone you may not agree with on personal beliefs.

because that is not the intent of this topic. I want to understand YOUR thinking, your epistemology, your position, your reasons.

The possibility of God to exist does not be based on the fact, if something is worth of respect , or not.

Quote:do you eat meat ? yes, just like a large part of the other animals in the world I eat what I was made to eat, omnivores eat meat and vegetation.

If animals and humans have the same value, why do you not eat humans ? animals eat animals, sometimes a certain species eats its own species. Why are you not cannibal ?

Quote:what makes you think, human kind with its superior intellect , and hability of thinking and complex , advanced communication, is on the same level as animals ?
because superiority is not a measurable thing. Every species is going to believe that they are the most superior because of the need to maintain their own existence. Humans have their reasons and are not capable of understanding the reasons of other species.

http://www.icr.org/dominion/

All cultures have acknowledged the superiority of man over all other animate life, life forms, and inanimate objects in nature, as reflected in the dominion mandate assigned to mankind by God. Man's authority over animals, plants, and the rest of the earth has changed history through the use and consumption of animals (livestock, riding horses, fishing, etc.) and plants (timber for wood, crops for food, etc.), as well as the physical environment (diverting river water for irrigation, harnessing wind power for sailing and windmills, using rocks for buildings, etc.).

In addition, all societies have a spoken language of abstract thought and concepts. Human communication is very different from anything observed in animals. Why? Mankind knows he is the proper creature fit to rule the earth. This makes sense only if man was created to be morally superior to animals, plants, and the earth.

Quote: what are your answers towards transsexualism and the simple concept of sex vs gender? what answer do you have for why the world isn't simply a punishment? My questions didn't get answered in church yes these were as a young child. I needed to understand what male and female were in a way beyond what others did, and I needed a reason to see the world as worth something after being molested at 5 years old.

there are no simple answerst to these issues, and they would extrapolate the topic of this thread. But you cannot deduce based on your difficult childhood that God does not exist, and that he does not care about you.

I am truly sorry for that. I know of many people, which had also also a suffered life , but when they found Jesus, their life changed dramatically in many ways.

Quote:I saw what you were suggesting throughout my childhood and you know what the best part about it was? I also saw what happens to them when they can't keep lying to themselves and faith loses it's luster.

well, i am a christian over 25 years, and i never felt that i was lying to myself. Actually , quit the oposit. I always felt to have acceptet Jesus into my life was the best decision i could have ever made, i never felt reptentance.

Quote:I don't ascribe to a religion. I confess Jesus Christ as my lord and savior.
Do you then not call yourself a christian? Calling yourself a christian is ascribing to a religion.

Nope. I ascribe myself to belong to the family of Christ.

Quote:The story of Adam and Eve in its entirety is a much longer tale with a lot more explanation. The story that appeared in genesis is a shortened version.

please present evidence of this.

Quote:Like a enciclopedia britannica ? can you imagine that it created itself through constant revisions becoming more and more complex ? An encyclopedia is an inanimate object that was never given the "breath of life" you cannot seriously claim an analogy between inanimate and animate object and expect a real response.

but there is a similarity of DNA and a enciclopedia britannica. Both do carry codified information. In fact, in just one of the trillions of cells that make up the human body, the amount of information in its genes would fill at least 1,000 books of 500 pages of typewritten information. Scientists now think this is hugely underestimated.
Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2011, 11:15 AM
 
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(26-05-2011 10:58 AM)ElShadai Wrote:  If animals and humans have the same value, why do you not eat humans ? animals eat animals, sometimes a certain species eats its own species. Why are you not cannibal?

It's called law and ethics. Take those away, give humanity 20 years and ask that very same question again.

PS. The Japanese eat fetuses. Pickled, not stirred. Just saying...

Quote:All cultures have acknowledged the superiority of man over all other animate life, life forms, and inanimate objects in nature, as reflected in the dominion mandate assigned to mankind by God. Man's authority over animals, plants, and the rest of the earth has changed history through the use and consumption of animals (livestock, riding horses, fishing, etc.) and plants (timber for wood, crops for food, etc.), as well as the physical environment (diverting river water for irrigation, harnessing wind power for sailing and windmills, using rocks for buildings, etc.).

All cultures are characterized by egocentricity. All cultures value themselves more than anything else. All cultures invented their own god to promote this idea. All cultures carry prehistoric notions in their collective consiousness.

Quote:In addition, all societies have a spoken language of abstract thought and concepts. Human communication is very different from anything observed in animals. Why? Mankind knows he is the proper creature fit to rule the earth. This makes sense only if man was created to be morally superior to animals, plants, and the earth.

Birds developed calls before us.
Whales invented the internet before us.
Dolphins formed speech before us.

We were simply lucky enough to use our mutated brain to integrate all those stuff.


Quote:there are no simple answerst to these issues, and they would extrapolate the topic of this thread. But you cannot deduce based on your difficult childhood that God does not exist, and that he does not care about you.

WTF? Please fart inside your own bubble. Maybe it will break.
God exists!!!!

Quote:I am truly sorry for that. I know of many people, which had also also a suffered life , but when they found Jesus, their life changed dramatically in many ways.

I guess the children in the link above just blocked Jesus from Facebook.

Quote:well, i am a christian over 25 years, and i never felt that i was lying to myself. Actually , quit the oposit. I always felt to have acceptet Jesus into my life was the best decision i could have ever made, i never felt reptentance.

Why would you? This way you can attribute all the crap that ever happened to you to something else other than personal failure.

Quote:Nope. I ascribe myself to belong to the family of Christ.

Have a DNA test done... just in case...

Quote:please present evidence of this.

ROFLMAOMFG(oat)

Quote:but there is a similarity of DNA and a enciclopedia britannica. Both do carry codified information. In fact, in just one of the trillions of cells that make up the human body, the amount of information in its genes would fill at least 1,000 books of 500 pages of typewritten information. Scientists now think this is hugely underestimated.

Name of author, year, title of publication, journal, country, publisher. It's called a citation. Do it. Smile
Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2011, 12:27 PM
 
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(26-05-2011 10:58 AM)ElShadai Wrote:   do you eat meat ? [b]yes, just like a large part of the other animals in the world I eat what I was made to eat, omnivores eat meat and vegetation.

If animals and humans have the same value, why do you not eat humans ? animals eat animals, sometimes a certain species eats its own species. Why are you not cannibal ?

El, you would do well to read your Bible before coming to what you give the
impression as thinking is an atheist site full of ignorance regarding such text.

Given you have chosen a SN from old Hebrew, you may find this relevant to your faith system. These passages for the most part relate to the siege of Jerusalem.

Deuteronomy 28:53-57

Because of the suffering that your enemy will inflict on you during the siege, you will eat the fruit of the womb, the flesh of the sons and daughters the Lord your God has given you. Even the most gentle and sensitive man among you will have no compassion on his own brother or the wife he loves or his surviving children, and he will not give to one of them any of the flesh of his children that he is eating. It will be all he has left because of the suffering your enemy will inflict on you during the siege of all your cities. The most gentle and sensitive woman among you - so sensitive and gentle that she would not venture to touch the ground with the sole of her foot - will begrudge the husband she loves and her own son or daughter the afterbirth from her womb and the children she bears. For she intends to eat them secretly during the siege and in the distress that your enemy will inflict on you in your cities.


2 Kings 6:26-29

As the king of Israel was passing by on the wall, a woman cried to him, "Help me, my lord the king!"The king replied, "If the Lord does not help you, where can I get help for you? From the threshing floor? From the wine press?" Then he asked her, "What's the matter?" She answered, "This woman said to me, 'Give up your son so we may eat him today, and tomorrow we'll eat my son.' So we cooked my son and ate him. The next day I said to her, 'Give up your son so we may eat him,' but she had hidden him."

Jeremiah 19:9 *My note* "I" in this passage is your god speaking.
I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and daughters, and they will eat one another's flesh during the stress of the siege imposed on them by the enemies who seek their lives.

This is pretty specific:

Lamentations 4:10

With their own hands compassionate women
have cooked their own children,
who became their food
when my people were destroyed.



Not to forget of course the symbolic cannibalism that takes place in the New Testament when one is asked to consume the flesh and blood of Christ in order to enter into his covenant. John 6:53-56
Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.



I've never heard of the Japanese eating (human?) Fetus before. However, there is a history of cannibalism in the world. As we all know, at least I would hope such is the case, morality is not universal. As such, what we in the west find immoral and reprehensible, relative to matters of cannibalism, is not necessarily the opinions or practices afforded by example in the rest of the world.

August 2010,
Cannibal Restaurant Has Berliners Disgusted

[Image: image-124404-panoV9free-fdln.jpg]

Big Think - 299 - Niam Niam: the Cannibal Map of the World
Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2011, 12:34 PM
 
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(26-05-2011 12:27 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  I've never heard of the Japanese eating (human?) Fetus before.

You are absolutely right. It is the Chinese that do that. I got my facts mixed. Dodgy
Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2011, 12:47 PM
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
Please forgive me for jumping in late, but I want to present a great video on how the universe can come from "nothing":
"A Universe From Nothing" a lecture by Lawrence Krauss (2009)

Oh, and to add to the whole "Human communication is very different from anything observed in animals" mistake: check out this chimp. She successfully learned American Sign Language... a human language. Apes have the same ability as humans to use and understand language, but they did not evolve the ability to speak.
Here's some more reading if you're interested: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17...-cant.html and http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...-mute.html

Finally, you stated that people are not born atheist (though the post you responded to argued that naturalism, not atheism, is the default position). I can tell you that myself and others I grew up with were not exposed to much religion as children or teens. My concept of "god(s)" was that they were supernatural, fictitious characters in stories (such as those in the Odyssey and the Bible). I have always been an agnostic atheist. It was my default position. I've always (and always will) posited that there is the possibility of a deity outside our observable universe who started the Big Bang. But I believe that if there is, not only does it not affect me, but it most definitely is not the god of the Bible (nor any other "holy" text).

"Remember, my friend, that knowledge is stronger than memory, and we should not trust the weaker." - Dr. Van Helsing, Dracula
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2011, 12:58 PM
 
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(26-05-2011 12:34 PM)Celestus87 Wrote:  
(26-05-2011 12:27 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  I've never heard of the Japanese eating (human?) Fetus before.

You are absolutely right. It is the Chinese that do that. I got my facts mixed. Dodgy
It happens. Smile
Do They Eat Babies in China?
Though the story about the Chinese eating fetus, smacking of an old practice known as blood liable, is actually an urban legend. (And just for clarification in the region surrounding - SNOPES re: Taiwan)
I think it can be promoted today as what some would hear about and consider a true story given how China at one time made a law against families having more than one child. That was rescinded after the massive earthquake some time ago, that decimated much of the Chinese population, so that families could heal and restore their line. I have not checked to see if the law has since been reimplemented.

That being said, I think it's important to mention that people in the States especially, are known to consume human placenta,a form of cannibalism, as a ritual following child birth.

I know pagans who commit to this practice, though I would never go to their house for dinner.Confused Link Sources
Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2011, 01:18 PM
 
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
It seems that all this was a big hoax. But I distinctly remember a video/picture showing jarred fetuses on super-market shelves. I just did some research on Zhu Yu and I could not find that particular picture listed as his. Undecided You seem to be the news reporter around here, so if you ever find the story of that picture (photoshop, real, Zhu Yu's), please send a link my way. Tongue
Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2011, 01:33 PM
 
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(26-05-2011 01:18 PM)Celestus87 Wrote:  It seems that all this was a big hoax. But I distinctly remember a video/picture showing jarred fetuses on super-market shelves. I just did some research on Zhu Yu and I could not find that particular picture listed as his. Undecided You seem to be the news reporter around here, so if you ever find the story of that picture (photoshop, real, Zhu Yu's), please send a link my way. Tongue

Well, Zhu Yu is a Chinese performance artist. He did create the images you're referring to and they were widely released in emails, after they caught on because of the graphic nature. The fetus was said to have been stolen, either by the artist or someone close to them, from a medical laboratory in China. Though I don't know that that has ever been substantiated. (Wiki)

The link I provided in the former reply relating to the probable urban legend that addresses the question, do they eat fetus in China, contains in part reference and one simple picture, of an article that did circulate some years ago in 1995 alleging that what caused this stir and the subsequent research on the matter. (***VIEWER /LINK WARNING! This link is for adults only. It does contain what appears to be a graphic display of fetus cannibalism***)
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: