Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Qur'anic studies today
Today at 03:21 PM

Coronavirus crisis
Today at 01:22 PM

What music are you listen...
Today at 12:11 PM

Is Iran/Persia going to b...
by zeca
Today at 05:38 AM

Muslim heritage?
Yesterday at 11:24 PM

Kashmir endgame
Yesterday at 05:36 PM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
Yesterday at 05:31 PM

Pakistan: The Nation.....
Yesterday at 02:51 PM

مدهش----- لماذا؟؟؟؟
by akay
February 21, 2020, 09:46 AM

Need help from mod/admin
February 20, 2020, 09:38 PM

German shisha bar shootin...
February 20, 2020, 08:47 AM

Excellence and uniqueness
February 19, 2020, 12:03 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves

 (Read 85365 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 10 11 1213 14 ... 37 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #330 - August 12, 2015, 05:02 PM

    What would convince you otherwise?


    An atheist accepting belief in God based on science and reasoning.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #331 - August 12, 2015, 07:08 PM

    HasTedBundytakenourGalfromtheUS and replaced her with Underscore gal?


    Naw I asked the admins to change my username so it's easier to read.  Cheesy

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #332 - August 12, 2015, 07:11 PM

    Deep, bro. But how do you know it's not actually this?


    Could very well be that. Would need to question it and see if it stands up to scrutiny.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #333 - August 12, 2015, 07:22 PM



    I can see where you are coming from regarding AI and computer viruses. So far a self conscious AI has not been created. We've been working on this for ages and ages. Who knows, maybe Google and co and conquer it. As for computer viruses they are not alive because they live in a virtual environment. For example I don't think anyone would count the characters in the Simms game alive even though they can be programmed to do everything we can do. A computer virus exists only in software just as the characters in the Simms games.

    As for the work done by the Venter Institute I read through their work a while ago. All they did was make synthetic DNA and put it into a cell. Which is great because it shows how technologically advanced we are. All they need to do is replicate a cell. Shouldn't too hard for them should it?
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #334 - August 12, 2015, 07:27 PM

    Well, for the past two weeks, what I've been saying is basically limited to how much I can type before I start losing water out an orifice, fall asleep, or lose the ability to pay attention because of being so dizzy or being in so much pain. I've been really quite ill. Most of the time what makes me tick is pretty straightforward, I like intelligence, I like learning, I like reading and analyzing religious texts, I like studying the real histories of the texts as opposed to the stories that were spun about them. I know liturgical Hebrew and have a degree in social work (basically community-based psychology) with a minor in sociology (would have minored in psychology but it required a psychoneuroimmunology course, and I'd already taken an overview course and didn't want to take a senior level one). I'm perfectly happy to go do some research if I have the stamina. My idea of a fun way to spend an afternoon is researching and writing an eight to fifteen page essay, and I'm interested in a wide array of topics. And I hate people who obfuscate to hide their willful ignorance or deception.


    Sorry that you are not feeling well. Hope you get better soon. As I suggested before try fasting, maybe that will strengthen your body.

    Why do you like "reading and analyzing religious texts"? Are you looking for something to make you believe in God.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #335 - August 12, 2015, 07:41 PM

    What would convince you that Vishnu, Shiva, and Brahman (as all lesser Gods) exist, that they are many and not one?


    There are huge contradictions for all of them to exist. They can't all be God because there can only be one all powerful being. They never said go and preach in their names.

    What would make you believe that Jesus is truly the Son of God and Holy Ghosts actually DO exist?


    If Jesus actually said himself that he was the literal son of God and if he did say I would ask why does God need to have son. I'd ask what makes Jesus a son and why is that special since there can only be one all powerful God.

    I do believe in the Holy Ghost/Spirit.

    I would believe it when I see it. How about you?


    What would you need to see to believe?

    Don't you find it bizzare that you don't actually have any empirical proof of God's existence?


    I am arguing that I do have empirical evidence. You are refusing to accept it.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #336 - August 12, 2015, 07:50 PM

    If writing things make it true, then unicorn, Santa Claus, and Kalongwewe really do exist? Don't you get presents if you behave well as a kid? Isn't it dangerous for kids to go out at nights?  All of these are true, so why don't these mythical creatures exist?


    Depends on you claims about Santa Claus. If you claimed that Santa Claus will bring me presents on Xmas day and someone called Santa Claus knocked on my door and gave me presents then it's true. That Santa Claus exists. Now if you say on Xmas day Santa Claus will give presents to all the good kids in the world at the same time then that is something that can be tested. If no kids got any presents at all then you could argue that no kid was good hence Santa did not turn up. So then you'd need to setup an experiment where you made sure that 10 or so kids we're all good and were spread out far enough that one person could not deliver the presents to them in order to test the claim.

    The unicorn as well as dragons could very well exist and we have just not seen them yet. However in order for me to believe in them I would need to scientifically test for them. If I don't have anything to test for then I'd simply say there isn't anything for me to test hence I don't believe.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #337 - August 12, 2015, 07:58 PM

    I too can make prophecies :

    1. Humans would reach greater heights of mobility, intelligence, and health than never before.
    2. Time will come for falsehood to disappear, as truth will prevail and banish the liars.
    3. Lives will be born from the dead - the ignorant will hate and punish you as they see fit. Be strong!
    4. As they learn that they have come from their animal counterparts, some will disbelieve and seek ignorance.

    ... etc

    Now would you worship Odin as our lord and savior? The Ice Giants have been banished, but they are coming back!

    What would convince you otherwise?


    So you claim to be a prophet of God? Who is this god and what can he do and why should I care?
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #338 - August 12, 2015, 09:27 PM

    I don't reject all the hadiths. I accept those that support the Quran. Yes I do expect you to go and Google. At the end of the day it will always come down to your judgement. I've clearly pointed out where I stand on apostasy, it's up to you to counter argue it if you believe I am wrong. You need to understand why those who support capital punishment for apostasy agree with it. I can't guess why you disagree or agree with it. I don't know what your questions are. I clearly said there is no capital punishment mentioned in the Quran for it. Now if you think otherwise then tell me. If you think the Quran has a verse which says kill the apostate then show me and we can take it from there.


    There is nothing to counter since you have not made an argument beyond that it is not in the quran. You ignored my point about hadith but gave no rational for rejecting what is considered an authentic collection. Hadith are part of the greater God claim. You also ignore sharia.


    Quote
    Yes, you have no need of dialog with me. The books are out there go and read and believe or disbelieve whatever you feel like. Don't take my word for it or others. It's for you to find out and convince yourself.


    That was not my point. The point is your are letting me pick your arguments for you. So if I pick an argument supporting the death penalty you must accept it as your argument. 

    Quote
    As I have asked many times before what kind of evidence do you want to see?


    It is up to your to provide evidence you think is convincing. So far your scientific approach is unsupported so try something else. This is your belief not my own, support your own claims. Perhaps you should of thought of what kind of evidence would be convincing before you made your claims.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #339 - August 12, 2015, 09:36 PM

    The evidence I have mentioned so far is convincing to me. That's all that matters.  No one has said anything that makes me doubt my thinking. I will always keep myself open to being proven wrong. If scientists can create life or they can show dust forming planets or even large masses via natural processes then I will have to accept it and consider my thinking wrong. I always have to do a reality check to make sure my evidence is credible especially since I have to believe in a "magical" hereafter.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #340 - August 12, 2015, 09:43 PM

    You ignored my point about hadith but gave no rational for rejecting what is considered an authentic collection. Hadith are part of the greater God claim. You also ignore sharia.


    My rational for ignoring certain hadiths is that a) they can be wrong and b) they're not relevant because I personally consider them irrelevant based on my understanding of the Quran and reasoning. I may well be wrong and I'm open to being corrected.

    Sharia is made up by humans. There is no formal "sharia law" mentioned in the Quran. If someone uses hadiths as part of their claim of God then that is their claim. It's up to individuals to accept it or reject it based on their own choice/reasoning.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #341 - August 12, 2015, 10:31 PM

    Subjective views are not convincing. You cherry picking without rational is not convincing. Appeals to emotions are not convincing. Keep in mind you are trying to convince others that your views are right thus you must provide objective arguments not subjective ones.

    You supported Sharia earlier, now you dismiss it since it contains uncomfortable facts about Islam.  If you dismiss secondary sources then you have no directional prayers, no claims regarding the House of God, etc.

    Try again.
    The evidence I have mentioned so far is convincing to me. That's all that matters.  No one has said anything that makes me doubt my thinking. I will always keep myself open to being proven wrong. If scientists can create life or they can show dust forming planets or even large masses via natural processes then I will have to accept it and consider my thinking wrong. I always have to do a reality check to make sure my evidence is credible especially since I have to believe in a "magical" hereafter.


    I guess you do not know what a debate is about. It's purpose is to convinces others that your argument is more convincing then the argument against your position. Subjective reasons are not convincing. Remember you took on the burden to prove you claim. Ignoring this burden is to admit you have no supportive arguments. You should tell Quod you concede defeat. Also you core argument is an argument from ignorance which is fallacious.

    Try again.

  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #342 - August 12, 2015, 10:33 PM

    Hilarious, now you are asking Quod if he wants to quit while you have done nothing to meet your burden of proof thus your claim about science proving God.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #343 - August 12, 2015, 10:45 PM

    If you dismiss secondary sources then you have no directional prayers, no claims regarding the House of God, etc.


    Are you saying that directional prayers are derived from hadiths?
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #344 - August 12, 2015, 11:24 PM

    Yes, practices are from Hadith rather than Quran. So you do not pray, nor perform the rituals of Hajj? No Wudhu or Istanja? No traditional dhikr? I know others like you, who reject all practices. You are in a minority.  Most Muslims do not accept any of your interpretations, which have no context without Hadith.

    Here is what you requested:

    Qur'an (4:89) - "They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper."

    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #345 - August 12, 2015, 11:33 PM

    Quote from: ted
    or they can show dust forming planets or even large masses via natural processes


    I don't understand why that would shake your faith in God. Couldn't you just say that God used whatever process it was to form the planets? That's what you did with every other natural process that seemed to be sprinkled in magical god juice until we figured it out scientifically.

    I don't understand why figuring out how your god might have done something would make you question whether or not he did it.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #346 - August 13, 2015, 12:07 AM

    There are huge contradictions for all of them to exist. They can't all be God because there can only be one all powerful being. They never said go and preach in their names.



    How do you know there can only be one all-powerful being? Also, why does a god have to be all-powerful, why can't it be powerful over a specific area of life, like the movement of a planet, lightening, growth of crops, a specific kind of animal, etc.?

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #347 - August 13, 2015, 10:29 AM

    I don't reject all the hadiths. I accept those that support the Quran. ..........


    What are those hadiths that you accept? Can you name them?
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #348 - August 13, 2015, 12:48 PM

    Ted DUMBO says
    Quote
    ................
    If you want to carry on then I suggest moving on. The next step was to destroy the theory that humans evolved from a primate/monkey or whatever you want to call  it

    destroy .......destroy .......destroy .....destroy

    Semi educated coupled to internet   makes smart people like Ted.,  It is good thing but some times they over do it and  utter such words..  The problem with   smart people like Ted is   "they often think they know more than everyone else."

    Ted.,   I guess your background  in  biological sciences  is as good as your background in Physics on subjects like  physico-chemical interactions that makes molecules to form larger masses..

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #349 - August 13, 2015, 02:01 PM

    Of course it is.  Afro

    Is my understanding of physics incorrect with regards to the formation of larger masses from dust? I simply agreed with the research kindly dug up by dr sloth. I wholeheartedly agree with the science. I just don't agree with most of the conclusions made by most people.

    We shall see if I "destroy" the theory of human evolution...

  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #350 - August 13, 2015, 02:33 PM

    You still haven't said which one. Huh?

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #351 - August 13, 2015, 03:29 PM

    How many are there?

  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #352 - August 13, 2015, 04:18 PM

    ...

    Is my understanding of physics incorrect with regards to the formation of larger masses from dust? .......

    Teddy., forget larger masses forming from the collisions/energy transfer  processes of  dust particles .. Go to simpler example which in one of the posts I already mentioned ..

    To start with take gas phase water........... "the water  vapor".......  and learn how that vaporized water vapor forms clouds? and learn  the mechanisms behind that process..  and.. and explain me that processes after that we will go to Dust to planets

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #353 - August 13, 2015, 09:35 PM

    Two refutations to Teds new points.

    One example of DNA evidence of species A and species B can reproduce is the Liger and Tigon. Any hybrid is an example of this. Look up hybrids and you found your evidence The other examples are contained within his own source, which he didn't bother to read.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_descent#Illustrations_of_common_descent
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #354 - August 13, 2015, 09:51 PM

    Thanks for the comment bogart.

    "One example of DNA evidence of species A and species B can reproduce is the Liger and Tigon. Any hybrid is an example of this. Look up hybrids and you found your evidence The other examples are contained within his own source, which he didn't bother to read. "

    But you're missing the point - try again? Sorry I should not say "try again" it's annoying.

    Let's take it nice and slowly. DNA is a physical molecular structure which is found in cells. So far scientific research has found that certain parts of this molecular structure is representative of traits in a living organism. How cells use DNA and what it is is still a bit of a mystery which scientists are still researching (an example of the gaps are getting bigger rather than smaller). Now DNA does NOT determine whether one living organism can reproduce with another. For example you cannot simply compare DNA of living organisms and use that to determine if the living organism is able to reproduce with another. The ONLY scientific evidence we have that one living organism can reproduce with one another is if we observe the living organism reproducing viable offspring. In the realm of evolution even this is not enough since the offspring has to be able to carry on reproducing.

    Let me clarify. It is not possible to look at DNA and determine if living organisms are able to reproduce with one another. If you think otherwise feel free to google all day long. I actually welcome you to google it as no one should take anyone's word for it.

  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #355 - August 13, 2015, 11:26 PM



    But you're missing the point - try again? Sorry I should not say "try again" it's annoying.

    Let's take it nice and slowly. DNA is a physical molecular structure which is found in cells. So far scientific research has found that certain parts of this molecular structure is representative of traits in a living organism. How cells use DNA and what it is is still a bit of a mystery which scientists are still researching (an example of the gaps are getting bigger rather than smaller). Now DNA does NOT determine whether one living organism can reproduce with another. For example you cannot simply compare DNA of living organisms and use that to determine if the living organism is able to reproduce with another. The ONLY scientific evidence we have that one living organism can reproduce with one another is if we observe the living organism reproducing viable offspring. In the realm of evolution even this is not enough since the offspring has to be able to carry on reproducing.

    Let me clarify. It is not possible to look at DNA and determine if living organisms are able to reproduce with one another. If you think otherwise feel free to google all day long. I actually welcome you to google it as no one should take anyone's word for it.


    NONSENSE.................  Ted Go back to school


    http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/32409/title/Replacement-Parts/
    http://www.cnet.com/news/donate-organs-no-grow-them-from-scratch/
    http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2012/engineering-health-tissue-engineering-growing-organs-1214
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-grow-new-organs/
    http://new.agrofresh.com.my/?page_id=169


    Mark Barfknecht has had dead intestine removed; his doctor is in the early stages of finding a way to grow replacement tissue.




    http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2011-07/using-lab-grown-trachea-surgeons-conduct-worlds-first-synthetic-organ-transplant




    Ted Forget Science..

     I do fight for your individual  freedom and I fight for others whose individual freedoms are threatened by religious bums..

    If you want to put  your head down in to the sand and ass up in to the sky and pray to whatever you like ... and preach whatever religion you like.  that is fine with me.   Individual like you must  have that freedom., again  I will fight for your freedom

    But stop PREACHING SCIENCE

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #356 - August 13, 2015, 11:32 PM

    Thanks for the comment bogart.

    "One example of DNA evidence of species A and species B can reproduce is the Liger and Tigon. Any hybrid is an example of this. Look up hybrids and you found your evidence The other examples are contained within his own source, which he didn't bother to read. "

    But you're missing the point - try again? Sorry I should not say "try again" it's annoying.


    Hybrids is an animal from two different species which can mate to product offspring. This is due to having similar DNA. You asked for an example. I gave you one

    Let's take it nice and slowly. DNA is a physical molecular structure which is found in cells. So far scientific research has found that certain parts of this molecular structure is representative of traits in a living organism. How cells use DNA and what it is is still a bit of a mystery which scientists are still researching (an example of the gaps are getting bigger rather than smaller). Now DNA does NOT determine whether one living organism can reproduce with another. [/quote]

    Yes it does. The Tiger and Lion are two similar species that are in the same genus. Their DNA is similar, hence why they can procduce hybrids rather than a Dog and Cat producing a hybrid


     
    Quote
    For example you cannot simply compare DNA of living organisms and use that to determine if the living organism is able to reproduce with another. The ONLY scientific evidence we have that one living organism can reproduce with one another is if we observe the living organism reproducing viable offspring. In the realm of evolution even this is not enough since the offspring has to be able to carry on reproducing.


    See above, you are wrong. It gives you examples in your own source, perhaps read it.

    Quote
    Let me clarify. It is not possible to look at DNA and determine if living organisms are able to reproduce with one another. If you think otherwise feel free to google all day long. I actually welcome you to google it as no one should take anyone's word for it.


    No need as the similarity of their DNA allows these hybrids to exist. You are asking for a predictive analysis as evidence but this is not required when we have a solid example in the two hybrids I mentioned. Where as a Human and a Chimp can not as Chimps are missing a chromosome, which contains the DNA during reproduction. You seem to never have taken grade school biology


  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #357 - August 13, 2015, 11:45 PM

    Quote
    DNA does NOT determine whether one living organism can reproduce with another.


    Yes it does. The Tiger and Lion are two similar species that are in the same genus. Their DNA is similar, hence why they can procduce hybrids rather than a Dog and Cat producing a hybrid................
     
    ...............................You seem to never have taken grade school biology


    bogart no point of talking science of DNA and evolutionary biology to fellows like Ted. What they need is PICTURES and WIKI LINKS what such fellows should do is go back to school..

    Fellows like Ted can not use their brain for thinking... Such fellows only believe when you can inject DNA in to them and make monkeys out of them in real time .. or inject DNA in to Monkey and make them human in real time in front of their eyes.. then they will believe ..

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_speciation
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_(biology)
    Origin and evolution of animal hybrid species.


    NEW BREEDS Hybridization examples include a zorse (zebra-horse) named Eclyse



    A male liger (lion-tiger) named Bahier



    Plenty of examples in nature...

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #358 - August 14, 2015, 12:28 AM

    And now I've been reminded of that, I really need to ask a biologist. lua, you're the nearest one. Any answer on the cockroach thing? I will be checking the comments thread.


    Whoops. Never would've seen that on my own. Had to wait until I got an adult job to argue with Ted, didn't you? Grin

    Unfortunately (fortunately?) I don't know too much about cockroaches. You wanna hear about fruitflies, though, forgettaboutit.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #359 - August 14, 2015, 07:54 AM


    If there is any scientist or science paper which can prove this then please cite me the research.



    Honestly, I'm not sure going to the trouble of finding scientific papers would be worth it, because I don't think you can understand the contents; and if you can and you're deliberately misrepresenting the contents, that's even worse. Your highest level of intellectual discussion right now seems to be quoting wikipedia. Don't get me wrong--wikipedia can be a good place to start your research. But it's not where to end your research. It's not where you should call it a day from, it's not where you should stop researching, because it's not going to be the most accurate and comprehensive analysis of any given topic. And if you can barely understand and/or accurately represent the contents of wikipedia, then I don't see how any further discussion on matters of science is going to be fruitful. Instead, like Quod, I think it would be more advantageous to just examine your beliefs on theology and how you back up those beliefs, instead of simply continuing to feed you science that you won't/don't understand.

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Previous page 1 ... 10 11 1213 14 ... 37 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »