Ancient Domains Of Mystery, forum overview / General / Darwinism
| Online users ( Unknown) |
| Application object not working properly at the moment, no clue who is online... * Numbers in parentheses are the number of minutes since the user last loaded a page. Logged-in users time out after 40 minutes (unless they manually log out), lurkers and anonymous posters after 20. |
This thread is 7 pages long.
| Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
|
Tianjin Registered user for monsters - Death incarnate Last page view: 5810 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes and 57 seconds ago. |
Here's something to get the ball rolling again. Darwinism MAY be true,but it's ultimately trivial. It is not an explanation for the existence of the universe. Evolution and natural selection MAY explain organic life, yet Darwinism leaves untouched the crucial mysteries: Who we are. Why we are here. How we are to behave toward one another. And: I have yet to see anyone really live like they believed in Darwinism. People who REALLY believe should be focused on health, (max. reproduction potential) education, (max earning potential to support huge family) polygamy. (max. genetic fitness potential) If you're letting the government dictate how many people you can marry/produce offspring with, you're a foolish Darwinist. Try the TiLiCat! It's experience! Tiger, stuffed with deboned Lion, stuffed with deboned Wildcat, and slow roasted with a mix of herbs. (served raw for Trolls) [Edited 1 time, last edit on 5/7/2007 at 01:48 (GMT -5) by Tianjin] |
||
|
Morio Registered user Holy Champion of ADoM Last page view: 4108 days, 22 hours, 57 minutes and 19 seconds ago. |
I'm going to suggest that this thread gets closed/deleted right away, because this will turn into a big flame war, as we have seen before. "I don't know what World War 3 will be fought with, but I know World War 4 with be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein |
||
|
ej Unregistered user |
why would someone who believes darwinism is correct want those things? |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4907 days, 19 hours, 2 minutes and 59 seconds ago. |
Morio: Actually, I miss the old religous debates. I think that it was the religion threads that Prompted Jan's "Heaven and Earth" description for the general section. I have never seen them turn into flame wars on this site. All: I would like to recommend a 20 line limit on all answers, though. [Edited 1 time, last edit on 5/7/2007 at 14:29 (GMT -5) by Caladriel] |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4907 days, 19 hours, 2 minutes and 59 seconds ago. |
Tianjin: I'm with ej. Why would belief that life has evolved on earth lead you to believe that you have to focus on Health an Polygamy? To phrase it a different way: Darwinism doesn't talk about the soul or moral codes or how we should live. Rather, it is a scientific theory about how modern day flora and fauna came to be modern day flora and fauna. I think you are right to say that Darwinism doesn't touch the questions you bring up, but I don't think Darwinism or the Theory of evolution wants to do so nor were they ever meant to do so. |
||
|
nOOb-mAsTeR Registered user Master of all things nOOby!!! Last page view: 5974 days, 14 hours, 36 minutes and 37 seconds ago. |
I'm interested to see what this thread turns into....I personally am a semi-faithful christian, in that I do believe in evolution along with god.... "You try to give Fang, the large dog the bone. Fang, the large dog says,"Do you know who I am, mortal?!?!" My smartest dog ever:D |
||
|
Darren Grey Registered user Last page view: 4450 days, 41 minutes and 19 seconds ago. |
You're treating "Darwinism" like it's some sort of religious belief, which it's not. As Caladriel says it's about something different, very seperate from any sort of moral, religious or social ideas. In the same way other sciences don't impact directly onto our moral values neither does the theory of evolution. However that certainly doesn't make the idea "trivial". It's science after all :) Waldenbrook, the dwarven shopkeeper, mumbles: "I'd offer 9 gold pieces for yer dwarven child corpse." |
||
|
Tianjin Registered user for monsters - Death incarnate Last page view: 5810 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes and 57 seconds ago. |
ej and Caladriel : Excellent health = max. reproduction potential (lots of healthy kids) Poor nutrition and health = disease and death Higher education = max. earning potential to support huge family Low education = no money to support a family Polygamy = max. genetic diversity = more probability that your descendants will be fit enough to pass on YOUR genes to future generations DINKs (double income no kids) and single-partner, one child families - if they tell you they believe in Darwinism - They don't live their belief. Whether you believe it or not doesn't make it religious, but if you believe something is true, and you live like it isn't, (1) you're acting foolishly, or (2) you don't really believe it. Try the TiLiCat! It's experience! Tiger, stuffed with deboned Lion, stuffed with deboned Wildcat, and slow roasted with a mix of herbs. (served raw for Trolls) |
||
|
Morio Registered user Holy Champion of ADoM Last page view: 4108 days, 22 hours, 57 minutes and 19 seconds ago. |
Here we go again :D No matter what you believe in, you would want good health and a good education. Polygamy => bigger chance that your own kids get children with one another => not good "Darwinism leaves untouched the crucial mysteries: Who we are. Why we are here. How we are to behave toward one another." 1. We have names, parents, and a bloodline that goes far. 2. Random chance 3. Common sence/trial and error (If I kill that guy his friends might get angry and kill me, so maybe that's not a good idea, but if I'm nice to him he might like me and be my friend too) "I don't know what World War 3 will be fought with, but I know World War 4 with be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein [Edited 1 time, last edit on 5/8/2007 at 09:34 (GMT -5) by Morio] |
||
|
Soirana Registered user Chaos Freak Last page view: 4360 days, 5 hours, 58 minutes and 10 seconds ago. |
>Higher education = max. earning potential to >support huge family >Low education = no money to support a family look at average family size in India and somewhere in Europe. you can produce quite good amount off offspings by beeing sperm donor in such case i must agrre education is one of priorities. A root is a flower that disdains fame. Kahlil Gibran(1883-1931) |
||
|
Darren Grey Registered user Last page view: 4450 days, 41 minutes and 19 seconds ago. |
Tainjin, why do you equate Darwinism with some sort of philosophy of life? Darwin himself never advocated such things, and the vast majority of evolutionary scientists don't either. Perhaps it is true that with selective breeding etc we could somehow further the human race, but there's no guarantee of that - it could have many side effects we wouldn't be able to predict. Polygamy doesn't necessarily lead to genetic diversity, and there are elements of cultural diversity we would lose if we didn't have one-parent families. It not in any way obvious that we should support things like polygamy based on evolutionary theories. A lot of animals don't do it, and rather importantly we have evolved not to do it - if that really was the right way then natural selection might have required us to be like that. Waldenbrook, the dwarven shopkeeper, mumbles: "I'd offer 9 gold pieces for yer dwarven child corpse." |
||
|
nOOb-mAsTeR Registered user Master of all things nOOby!!! Last page view: 5974 days, 14 hours, 36 minutes and 37 seconds ago. |
Darwinism...touchy topic. we are different, and natural selection only goes so far. If natural selection proves true, then the species that are the oldest should be the most advanced, and furthermore, if we are related to and evolved from apes, I find it odd as to how most species have had a sub group change at least once(reptiles to birds, mammals to sea mammals, fish to mammals...) yet we humans apparently trace our genetic roots from a purely mammal descent, and only monkeys.....which brings up another point: monkeys haven't even been on the earth nearly as long as some other animals(turtles, bacteria, alligators, trees) so how is it possible that we could have evolved from them? I find it highly improbably that we are the only species to be so highly developed, whereas plant life has never developed any intelligence, nor has a good bit of mammals....I may have drifted a bit off topic, but its close to darwinism and its aspects. "You try to give Fang, the large dog the bone. Fang, the large dog says,"Do you know who I am, mortal?!?!" My smartest dog ever:D |
||
|
Darren Grey Registered user Last page view: 4450 days, 41 minutes and 19 seconds ago. |
Noob, we developed intelligence because it was helpful for us in our evolution - other animals haven't been in a situation to take advantage of that. Only certain primates have opposable thumbs and can use tools. Certain species, like plants, don't evolve much because they thrive as they are. "Intelligence" is not the objective of evolution - survival and breeding are the only key aims. Waldenbrook, the dwarven shopkeeper, mumbles: "I'd offer 9 gold pieces for yer dwarven child corpse." |
||
|
Tianjin Registered user for monsters - Death incarnate Last page view: 5810 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes and 57 seconds ago. |
Darren Grey, "Polygamy doesn't necessarily lead to genetic diversity" If I have three partners; one from Asia, one from Europe, and one from Africa, how could that not produce greater genetic diversity than just one partner? Multiple partners means greater genetic diversity. "...equate Darwinism with some sort of philosophy of life?" A belief is a belief - religious or not. If you believe X to be true, you act accordingly. If not, not. You believe gravity to be true, and your whole life is patterned accordingly. If you didn't, you'd likely be dead already. If a person TRULY believes in natural selection, and survival of the fittest, they would be doing everything they could to maximize their chances of survival, for themselves and their children. If not, they don't really believe. In my experience, most people who claim they believe in evolution don't live their belief. Cultural diversity - who cares? It's survival of the fittest - culture won't help my offspring survive disease, be faster, stronger or smarter. Genetics and training will. Try the TiLiCat! It's experience! Tiger, stuffed with deboned Lion, stuffed with deboned Wildcat, and slow roasted with a mix of herbs. (served raw for Trolls) [Edited 1 time, last edit on 5/9/2007 at 05:00 (GMT -5) by Tianjin] |
||
|
Tianjin Registered user for monsters - Death incarnate Last page view: 5810 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes and 57 seconds ago. |
Morio, If we are here by chance, then it's winner takes all - If I dominate the gene pool, I win, and you're out. If relationships/behavior towards each other is trial and error, why wouldn't I secretly kill you and increase my genetic chances? (as long as I can really do it secretly, and avoid the consequences) "Polygamy => bigger chance that your own kids get children with one another => not good" Gorillas, Chimpanzees, and monkeys are our closest evolutionary relatives, NONE of them are monogamous. Humans aren't even momogamous, there are many societies who currently sanction polygyny (many wives), and there have been societies that have sanctioned polyandry (many husbands). Western cultures don't follow polygamy because of religion. Believing in evolution and following a religious custom? Not logical. Try the TiLiCat! It's experience! Tiger, stuffed with deboned Lion, stuffed with deboned Wildcat, and slow roasted with a mix of herbs. (served raw for Trolls) [Edited 1 time, last edit on 5/9/2007 at 06:05 (GMT -5) by Tianjin] |
||
|
Soirana Registered user Chaos Freak Last page view: 4360 days, 5 hours, 58 minutes and 10 seconds ago. |
>If a person TRULY believes in natural selection, >and survival of the fittest, they would be doing >everything they could to maximize their chances of >survival, for themselves and their children. >If not, they don't really believe. if you haven't read before i could repeat: darvinism is an explanation of how species develop. (in long terms actually) i see no way how it is connected with meaning of life, religion, etc. personally i live and wanna be happy. i found no place for some stupidity like spreading your genes (unless i have fun in the process, which happens surprisingly often) you really believe gene diversity will be interesting foryou while lying in cementary, being worms' food? A root is a flower that disdains fame. Kahlil Gibran(1883-1931) |
||
|
Tianjin Registered user for monsters - Death incarnate Last page view: 5810 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes and 57 seconds ago. |
Soriana, "if you haven't read before i could repeat: darvinism is an explanation of how species develop. (in long terms actually) i see no way how it is connected with meaning of life, religion, etc." Darwinism and evolution are an explanation of how the species that now dominate the earth came to be dominant. If my genes get passed on to 10 children, and yours to 1, my genes will dominate yours. You will die, as I will die, but my genetics will (likely)live on and yours(probably) won't. That is survival of the fittest. That is the meaning of life according to Darwin. You don't have to like it. It is not a religion. (though some treat it like one) It is the truth. Try the TiLiCat! It's experience! Tiger, stuffed with deboned Lion, stuffed with deboned Wildcat, and slow roasted with a mix of herbs. (served raw for Trolls) [Edited 1 time, last edit on 5/9/2007 at 10:38 (GMT -5) by Tianjin] |
||
|
Morio Registered user Holy Champion of ADoM Last page view: 4108 days, 22 hours, 57 minutes and 19 seconds ago. |
"If my genes get passed on to 10 children, and yours to 1, my genes will dominate yours. You will die, as I will die, but my genetics will (likely)live on and yours(probably) won't." That depends on your genes, Soirana might have strong genes whereas yours might be weaker, that's natural selection in a nutshell, the best genes survive, not the ones that get the most kids. "If relationships/behavior towards each other is trial and error, why wouldn't I secretly kill you and increase my genetic chances? (as long as I can really do it secretly, and avoid the consequences)" There's no reason why you you couldn't kill me, if you somehow could be sure you'd get away with it. But there's the chance that you'll get caught. One reason for you not to kill me is that humans have very highly developed feelings and you'd probably feel guilt for taking someones life. And also you would remove my genes from the genepool, which would reduce the generic diversity. "I don't know what World War 3 will be fought with, but I know World War 4 with be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein |
||
|
Darren Grey Registered user Last page view: 4450 days, 41 minutes and 19 seconds ago. |
Evolution is not the only explanation for how we came to be dominant - read up on human evolution a bit and you'll see there's a lot of conflicting ideas behind why we succeeded over the neanderthals. Quite of lot of theories say it wasn't simply a matter of "survival of the fittest". Furthermore, evolution also explains why we have so many flora and fauna, none of which are dominant. They are enjoying life being able to breed and feed, and that let's them continue in life. Evolution is what happens when a species cannot survive and must adapt, thus pushing it in another direction. Humanity, as a dominant species, has no specific need to evolve - otherwise we would be doing so naturally. And on top of that evolution only describes how we got here in the first place. There are many different ways to interpret how this should affect your life. Some might say that we should have eugenics and polygamy - others might say that factors like morals or religious belief outweigh such heartless notions. Personally I belief that things like morals and love are what has made us dominant - it is through helping each other and forming wide communities that we've been able to take over the planet. Destroying that would reduce us to a warlike species that competes for resources and women (okay, you could argue we're a lot like that already, but we could be a lot worse). Waldenbrook, the dwarven shopkeeper, mumbles: "I'd offer 9 gold pieces for yer dwarven child corpse." |
||
|
Tianjin Registered user for monsters - Death incarnate Last page view: 5810 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes and 57 seconds ago. |
Morio, Stronger genes, - sometimes. More children with more partners = better chances. If I have 10 children living on 5 continents, If you have 1 child living on 1, and: 1- a pandemic virus kills 8 of my children and your 1 survives, I'm still ahead. 2- a meteor strikes the earth and wipes out most of the northern hemisphere, and 1 of mine survives, and yours doesn't, I'm still ahead. Many people don't like this idea because it seems distastefully unfriendly, and against their beliefs of kindness and brotherly love. (Christian ideals, and nothing to do with evolution) They refuse to think about it, or act on it because it offends their idea of 'right' and 'wrong'. If you believe something, follow your belief! Don't worry about what others think of you. They're not thinking clearly anyway. Try the TiLiCat! It's experience! Tiger, stuffed with deboned Lion, stuffed with deboned Wildcat, and slow roasted with a mix of herbs. (served raw for Trolls) [Edited 1 time, last edit on 5/9/2007 at 11:55 (GMT -5) by Tianjin] |
||
|
Tianjin Registered user for monsters - Death incarnate Last page view: 5810 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes and 57 seconds ago. |
Darren Grey, I have read many theories of evolution - for many species. I have a Bachelor's of Science in Biology, (and a simultaneously obtained Bachelor's of Arts in French - why I wanted to study French, I don't remember. Maybe it was because of the girls.) There are many theories, they boil down to this: Some survived, some didn't. Why? - pure speculation. Every species of flora/fauna IS dominant in it's own small particular ecological niche, and in fierce competition out of it. Lots of people like to pretend they aren't competing - I prefer to be honest. Try the TiLiCat! It's experience! Tiger, stuffed with deboned Lion, stuffed with deboned Wildcat, and slow roasted with a mix of herbs. (served raw for Trolls) |
||
|
Darren Grey Registered user Last page view: 4450 days, 41 minutes and 19 seconds ago. |
Taking the example of a meteor strike, in present society there would be a strong effort across the globe for others to help each other and ensure the survival of the species, even the ones that might be considered genetically inferior. Our ideas of friendship and brotherly love (not just Christian ideals - they are at the root of every major religion and many non-religious philosophies going back millenia) help us survive in spite of major catastophes that would wipe out other species. It's only by co-operation and our social constructs that we've managed to develop technology, medicine, etc to the stage it is in now. Without that we'd just be fairly smart wild animals, and we wouldn't have achieved anything in our brief existence other than breeding. You're right that it's pure speculation as to why humans survived and thrived, and I'm saying that your ideas are pure speculation as well. You are using supposedly logical constructs with no firm basis to justify grand ideas that are beyond any of our abilities to properly predict. Furthermore you're criticising people that don't agree with your philosophies, saying that they somehow aren't using the discoveries of Darwin properly. Your ideas are pure theory, and I personally believe are quite dangerous in some respects. They can be used to justify eugenics, genocide, and not caring for the disabled and elderly, and if accepted on mass could lead to the downfall of the society that makes us tower above other animals. Waldenbrook, the dwarven shopkeeper, mumbles: "I'd offer 9 gold pieces for yer dwarven child corpse." |
||
|
Maelstrom Registered user The Knight of the Black Rose Last page view: 3327 days, 20 hours, 10 minutes and 31 seconds ago. |
Tianjin - to me, what you're saying is that if I believe 2+2=4, I should live my life to prove it. I don't. I don't care if I create a dominant species, or even if my genes get passed on. Why should I? Darwin wrote a book on how he thought the species he knew came to be. Since when is that a religion, or even a belief? It's theory, meaning that it can be scientificaly proven to be right or false. It is NOT a belief, it's a scientific theory. People who live their lives focusing on some shit, because they believe in a theory, should be shot. Well, not really, but beaten severly. ;) A pessimist sees a dark tunnel. An optimist sees a light at the end of that tunnel. A realist sees a train. And the train driver sees three idiots on the tracks. |
||
|
Tianjin Registered user for monsters - Death incarnate Last page view: 5810 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes and 57 seconds ago. |
Maelstrom, "...what you're saying is that if I believe 2+2=4, I should live my life to prove it." No, I'm saying that how you live your life reflects what you really believe. We all live our lives believing bone-deep that 2+2=4. If somebody lived as if 2+2=5, they'd be in jail for fraud, or dead, or crazy. Some people SAY they believe in evolution, but the way they live their lives proves them to be liars. __________________________________________________ Darren Grey, They are not MY ideas, they are Darwin's. They are not speculation. It is NOT pure theory. We all see it happen every day - whether we notice or not. Darwin wrote: "In the struggle for survival, the fittest win out at the expense of their rivals because they succeed in adapting themselves best to their environment." There is nothing friendly about this. It IS dangerous, it is the struggle for life. Those who don't work hard enough to be fit will die. Yes, it could be used to TRY to justify eugenics, genocide, and not caring for the disabled and elderly, AND abortion of unwanted girls(here in China) or boys. That would be wrong - that is humanity deciding what is 'fit' based upon a cultural construct. I am talking about Nature deciding what is fit to survive. Will you scold Nature? Will it care? Try the TiLiCat! It's experience! Tiger, stuffed with deboned Lion, stuffed with deboned Wildcat, and slow roasted with a mix of herbs. (served raw for Trolls) [Edited 1 time, last edit on 5/10/2007 at 04:15 (GMT -5) by Tianjin] |
||
|
nOOb-mAsTeR Registered user Master of all things nOOby!!! Last page view: 5974 days, 14 hours, 36 minutes and 37 seconds ago. |
"Without that we'd just be fairly smart wild animals, and we wouldn't have achieved anything in our brief existence other than breeding." -Darren Grey Doesn't sound too bad to me....;D And I don't know if I'm the only one here, but it seems that as if Tianjin just wants to argue...despite me agreeing with him partially, it still seems as if you Tianjin just want to argue...dunno if you're bored or something, if you are, just go and spread your genes man:D "You try to give Fang, the large dog the bone. Fang, the large dog says,"Do you know who I am, mortal?!?!" My smartest dog ever:D |
||
|
Darren Grey Registered user Last page view: 4450 days, 41 minutes and 20 seconds ago. |
Tianjin: I'm not saying that what Darwin said is speculation. I'm saying your conclusions of what's the best way to live are speculation, since you can't easily prove them. Your quote from Darwin is about struggle for survival. Do we struggle now? Do we really have rivals to contend with? With no great threat to humanity people tend to concentrate on other things that have more meaning and value in their lives, like the arts, the sciences, or maybe just family life. You could argue that a lot of people lead worthless lives, but with the social constructs we have in place humanity is able to advance in many fields like medicine, technology, space exploration and particle physics - all of which are making us an even more superior species, far faster than evolution ever allowed before. Waldenbrook, the dwarven shopkeeper, mumbles: "I'd offer 9 gold pieces for yer dwarven child corpse." |
||
|
Tianjin Registered user for monsters - Death incarnate Last page view: 5810 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes and 58 seconds ago. |
nOOb-mAsTeR, This all started a few days ago, when two friends of mine that I respect made some comments - Something like: A - "You can't have love and evolution." B - "What are you babbling about?" A - "No, I'm serious..." (goes into long rambling thoughts) I had never really thought of it like that before, and upon consideration, I agreed with him. You can have love, or evolution, but they cannot be mixed. Love is FREELY given, or it isn't love. With evolution/natural selection: there is always an ulterior motive, or strings attached, or some requirement, or something the other person will get in return - so it's NOT love. (Lust, or some kind of exchange, but not love) Many people I know also like to compete, scocially, for 'status', but try really hard to make it seem like they're not competing - to win what? Try the TiLiCat! It's experience! Tiger, stuffed with deboned Lion, stuffed with deboned Wildcat, and slow roasted with a mix of herbs. (served raw for Trolls) [Edited 1 time, last edit on 5/10/2007 at 02:57 (GMT -5) by Tianjin] |
||
|
Tianjin Registered user for monsters - Death incarnate Last page view: 5810 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes and 58 seconds ago. |
Darren Grey, People do compete for resources. Both of us live well, we're not struggling - as evidenced by the fact that we live on more than 2 dollars/day. (unlike 1 billion of the people in the world) But we are still struggling, aren't we? Does everyone in England cooperate and share all their resources and research? Only 1 person graduates with Highest Honors. Only a few people get those 50,0000-pound-a-year jobs. Whether we should or not, we're still competing to 'win' something in our 'modern' societies, even if we're not at all sure what we're competing for,(I'm not) or how to do it best. Try the TiLiCat! It's experience! Tiger, stuffed with deboned Lion, stuffed with deboned Wildcat, and slow roasted with a mix of herbs. (served raw for Trolls) [Edited 1 time, last edit on 5/9/2007 at 23:14 (GMT -5) by Tianjin] |
||
|
Darren Grey Registered user Last page view: 4450 days, 41 minutes and 20 seconds ago. |
Most people don't compete for Highest Honors or whatever other high status things you might want to list. Most people are happy living mundane lives, or achieving small things of no import. Some people actually spend their lives helping others. A lot of people give to charity, something which you must say goes directly against the "survival of the fittest" philosophy. I'm not saying that we live a perfect life of bliss, but we don't have any pressure on us to force us to evolve as a species. What you're saying about love and evolution is only true if you look at survival of the fittest from the perspective of individuals. It can be argued (though only conjecture of course) that our ideas of love started off as animals helping each other out to compete against other species, and that fraternity and all that is so deep-rooted in our culture because it was a necessary part of our evolution into intelligent creatures. Another thing to consider is whether evolution should apply any more once we develop technology far enough to better ourselves. Evolution is after all a slow process, but technology is advancing at an amazing rate, and there will come a time when we can make make ourselves superior physically and mentally (whether through genetic manipulation or perhaps cyborg technology). Evolution will no longer be relevant. Good or bad thing? Of course, that's all a matter for science fiction writers... Waldenbrook, the dwarven shopkeeper, mumbles: "I'd offer 9 gold pieces for yer dwarven child corpse." |
||
|
Morio Registered user Holy Champion of ADoM Last page view: 4108 days, 22 hours, 57 minutes and 20 seconds ago. |
"Some people SAY they believe in evolution, but the way they live their lives proves them to be liars." I believe in evolution, I believe that at some stage humanes evolved from monkeys, that doesn't mean that I have to pass on my genes. What if I don't want to have kids, or I'm just too lazy, does that mean that I can't believe in evolution? "I don't know what World War 3 will be fought with, but I know World War 4 with be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein |
| Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |