FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
History: Fiction or Science?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 16, 17, 18  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
copra



Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 41

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Cracrocrates,

Yes, Muhammad is buried in Medina, and so is his family and at least many companions. Which is logical if they died there.

When I say they are called "moros", don't mean that they are not muslims, they are, but in Spain they were called "moros", but the religion was islam, that is not in question, if their religion had not been islam, they would not have been called "moros", they would have been called whatever they were as a religion, jew, moro or cristian. The word did not refer to a race or an origin. And if somebody converted, became a "moro". So, that is why I wonder too how exactly matches Fomenko all this, because there is a lot to match, and there is plenty of literature and biographies and descriptions of places in different times. I guess time could be shortened somewhat, but not very, very much. You would have to compress people who were not contemporaries in too short a time. AI don't know whether Fomenko has done that and explained it.


Going to the oral part, I still know by heart pages and pages of poetry that I learnt as a child and as a young. And sound memory is very faithful. It is true, you may change what you remember -if you want to change it. But you can remember perfectly without change if you don't want to change it. [I am afraid it gets more difficult with age and the bad habit of reading, reading, reading, without remembering, remembering, remembering]. Since the beginning there were a lot of people who knew the Quran by heart and since it was and is recited whole everywhere at the very least during ramadan, and passages of it all the time during prayers and any other occasion, had there been differences they would have been spotted as soon as they arose, since a number of people would have pointed them out. Also it is a text that lends itself very much to be learnt by heart. On the other hand the Quran, if not printed, was widely possessed, and any mistake in the copy would be easily corrected by the holder. It was not something that you had to go very far to check.


On another apsect of this chronology, I wonder what is, for instance, with material archeological remains. ¿Is there a problem with them? I mean, I guess that a dating as accurate as possible of mumies, like that of Ramses II has been done, does Fomenko look into it? What about the whole lot of Tut Ankh Amun" tomb? It must have been dated, and there were plenty of objects to allow a good try at it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
James D



Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 874

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cracrocrates wrote:
I mean, every Muslim has to go to Mecca sometime or other to see that thing...Catholics aren't told that they must see Vatican City before they die, for example.



Yeah, maybe, but be careful there is a small chapel here on the Atlantic coast of Galicia, NW Spain called San Andrés de Teixido (see here):-

http://www.jorgetutor.com/spain/galicia/a_corunha_provincia/san_andres/san_andres.htm

"San Andrés de Teixido vaí de morto o que non foi de vivo"
St. Andrew of Teixido - He goes when dead he who didn't go when alive!!!

So just in case I'd maybe pay those sacred sites a visit - while you have the chance! Shocked
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cracrocrates



Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 269

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 7:15 pm    Post subject: Criticisms of Radiocarbon Dating Reply with quote

Criticisms of Radiocarbon Dating

copra wrote:
...with material archeological remains. ¿Is there a problem with them? ...mumies... Ramses II has been done, does Fomenko look into it?.... Tut Ankh Amun" tomb?


Fomenko definitely looked into it.
Major, major shenanigans with archaeology datings in general, including radiocarbon (carbon-14) dating.

Turns out that
1) the "scientific" results tend to be useless generally, during the last 2000 years especially...not to mention that the dating method was originally calibrated using textbook samples/examples where the original date was supposedly already known; since radiocarbon dating relies on the Scaligerian chronology to begin with, this method relies on circular reasoning

2) a archaeologist/businessman/academic trying to capitalize typically sends a sample to a lab telling the lab THE DATE they expect to get back so the labs that do these things have a financial incentive to tell the customer what he/she wants

3) samples from the same object sometimes provide results that differ from each other by THOUSANDS OF YEARS ; if its not what is expected, the vested interest does not make the information public ( perhaps getting another lab to test until the desired answer is received ?) and academics rarely publish unexpected results; some of the businessman involved (like in the Athens: The Tourist Trap post) are much more like P.T. Barnum/circus promoters than searching for historical truth

Fomenko's main criticisms of radiocarbon dating can be found in:
Chronology 1, in Chapter 1, pages 74-90.

It's broken down into two sections:
15.ARE RADIOCARBON DATINGS TO BE TRUSTED? (pages 74-80)
http://books.google.com/books?q=fomenko+radiocarbon+trusted&btnG=Search+Books

16.CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE HYPOTHESES ON WHICH THE RADIOCARBON METHOD IS BASED (pages 80-90)
http://books.google.com/books?q=fomenko+radiocarbon+mischenko&btnG=Search+Books


Here's an excerpt from page 80 on dating Egyptian artifacts:
Quote:
http://books.google.com/books?q=fomenko+radiocarbon+mischenko&btnG=Search+Books

15.3 Modern radiocarbon analysis
of Egyptian artefacts demonstrates
serious contradictions



We shall once again consider the alleged reliability
of the radiocarbon method as used for supporting the
traditional version of the "ancient" history, particularly
Egyptian, as reflected in a fundamental and detailed
article published by the Manchester Museum in
England in 1979 as part of the project named "The
Mummies of the Manchester Museum" ([ 1196] ). This
most remarkable material was recommended to us by
Professor A. Kravtsevich from the Alberta University
Department of Mathematics, Edmonton, Canada.

The topic of the article is a dating that had amazed
the authors of the article and put them in a quandary
([1196]). The radiocarbon dating of the mummy
# 1770 from the Manchester Museum collection had as-
cribed the mummy's bones to 1000 B.C., whereas the
cloth that the mummy has been wrapped in received
the dating of 380 A.D. The discrepancy between the
datings of the mummy and the cloth equals to roughly
1400 years, although the dates should be equal. The
cloth may have been somewhat older than the mummy
if an old cloth had been used by the embalmers, but it
couldn't possibly have belonged to a later age.


According to the authors of the article, this gap of
nearly a millennium and a half cannot be explained
by the possible errors of the radiocarbon dating, the
way it is usually done today. That is why they had to
come up with the rather amusing "explanation" that
the old mummy had been exhumed after fifteen hun-
dred years, and re-wrapped in a new cloth, and then
restored to its rightful place as though it had remained
unperturbed all the while.


We think this to be perfectly preposterous. Our
take is that we encounter yet another imprecision of
the actual method of radiocarbon dating which is
apparently affected by effects of an undefined nature
leading to great discrepancies in datings of 1,500
years, for instance (see the examples of the greatly
misdated modern specimens cited above, with the
fluctuation amplitude reaching up to two millennia).

The authors of the article also confess to the fact
that at the very dawn of the radiocarbon method "an-
cient" Egyptian specimens had been used for its cali-
bration, with their dates taken from history textbooks

([1196], page 137). Here's a verbatim quote: "the use
of the method commenced in 1948 in Chicago Uni-
versity and was initiated by Professor W. F. Libby. .. the
Egyptian chronology played a great role in the nais-
sance of the method, since Egyptian specimens, such
as wood or charcoal, among others, have been used as
standards for the known historical dates" ([ 1196], page
137). Thus, the radiocarbon scale used nowadays had
initially been made largely dependent on the Scali-
gerian chronology of the "ancient" Egypt, and there-
fore needs to be revised.

_________________
" 'New World Order' ?...same as the Old World Order "

Church of Crac motto:
"The End is Nigh. Give me a Dollar."


--Cracrocrates
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
foo



Joined: 18 Nov 2006
Posts: 140

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 5:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is a fundamental scientific flaw in radiocarbon dating.

You can start with this article on Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_14

(On some matters, I don't trust Wikipedia. With basic science, though, they usually get it right.)

Note that "The half-life of carbon-14 is 5730±40 years." This means that all of the carbon-14 would have disintegrated eons ago, were it not recreated from time to time.

Wikipedia continues, "Carbon-14 is produced in the upper layers of the troposphere and the stratosphere by thermal neutrons absorbed by nitrogen atoms. When cosmic rays enter the atmosphere, they undergo various transformations, including the production of neutrons..."

Please hang on; I'm getting there. The level of cosmic rays reachng the Earth is not constant. A nova or a supernova event increases the level of cosmic rays, for instance. (Quick note: Cosmic rays is something of a misnomer. They are not like, for instance, X-rays. Rather, they are particles.)

Moreover, the solar wind provides an insulating blanket, blocking some level of cosmic rays from reaching the Earth. And the strangth of the solar wind varies, with the variations in the sun's activity.

Here's where I've been heading: Radiocarbon dating is based on measuring the percentage of carbon-14 in a sample. If you know the percentage of carbon that was carbon-14 at the time that an organism was alive, then you can discern how long ago the organiism died. However, because the production of carbon-14 varies over time, there is no way to know what the carbon-14 percentage was at the time that the organism was alive.

You can't know how much carbon-14 has disintegrated, unless you know how much carbon-14 there was to begin with, and there is no way to determine that.

Martin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cracrocrates



Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 269

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:59 am    Post subject: summary post Reply with quote

In one post on my blog, I created a list of links to most (about 50) of my posts from this BFN Fomenko thread, with short summaries and occasional excerpts or page links to Google Books.

The list is after the wikipedia excerpts here:
http://cracrocrates.blogspot.com/2007/11/anatoly-fomenko-and-new-chronology.html
"Anatoly Fomenko and the New Chronology"

_________________
" 'New World Order' ?...same as the Old World Order "

Church of Crac motto:
"The End is Nigh. Give me a Dollar."


--Cracrocrates
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Cracrocrates



Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 269

PostPosted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 4:58 pm    Post subject: Map that named America is a puzzle for researchers Reply with quote

"Map that named America is a puzzle for researchers"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071203/us_nm/usa_map_dc;_ylt=As8sjy8uFZKAde_jUSRE8nYDW7oF

About the the only surviving 1507 Waldseemuller map that supposedly named America is just now going into the Library of Congress.

John Hebert, chief of the geography and map division of the Library of Congress, implied that given what Europeans were believed to have known about the world at the time, it should not have been possible for the mapmakers to make the now-famous map.

(My earlier post "Analyzing Old Maps" http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=28370#28370
mentioned anomalies on old maps that Fomenko wrote about)

_________________
" 'New World Order' ?...same as the Old World Order "

Church of Crac motto:
"The End is Nigh. Give me a Dollar."


--Cracrocrates
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
SidVicious



Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Posts: 338
Location: AU

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 2:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh wow check that article out!!

"It's a mystery!!"

Yeah right.

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cracrocrates



Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 269

PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 6:34 pm    Post subject: Aristotle Reply with quote

I joined the revisedhistory.org forum a few months ago, and here's a very very LONG thread I started on Aristotle:

http://www.revisedhistory.org/forum/showthread.aspx?m=170002

Basically, I was listening to audiobooks of Artistotle's "Politics" and most of it sounded fairly modern to me (post 18th or 19th century).

Thought I found something here
Quote:
Also, this part sounded odd to me today, from "Politics", Book 7, Part X
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/politics.7.seven.html
"And we may infer that in political institutions the same rule holds. EGYPT witnesses to the antiquity of all these things, for the Egyptians appear to be of all people the most ancient; and they have laws and a regular CONSTITUTION EXISTING FROM TIME IMMEMORIAL. "

I know Davidenco & Kelser in Book of Civilization mentioned the similarity of E-GYP-T and GYP-SIES, but I've never heard of either Ancient Egyptians (a dictatorship/pharoes?) or gypsies (nomadic?) having a freaking CONSTITUTION.


but then came across
Quote:
Damn ! Maybe I placed too much importance on that phrase "Egypt" and "Constitution" line, because Aristotle mentions the "pyramids of Egypt" in Book 5 of "Politics" and the Nile and Egypt in another book called "Metereology." So (for whatever reason), Aristotle thought Egypt had a "constitution" ?


Also, apparently a search of "Alexander" the Great (Artistotle's famous pupil) among Aristotle's works turns up absolutely nothing

Quote:
Type in at google.com the following:
site:http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle Alexander

or just go directly to:

http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=site:http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle+Alexander&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8


Quote:
The three passages with "Alexander" I listed earlier may have nothing to do with "Alexander the Great" at all...which would mean that today we don't have even ONE WORD where Aristotle refers to his famous pupil ? How odd is that ?


Revisedhistory forum member Ron suggests that Aristotle (possibly) may have been Arab scholar Averroes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Averroes

And, as far as regarding Aristotle's FATHER:
Quote:
Aristotle's FATHER was supposedly a doctor named "Nicomachus."

According to wikipedia, there were SIX people known by that name:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicomachus_(disambiguation)

Kind of reminds me of the whole Christian trinity...was Nico the FATHER, the SON, or the holy ghost ? Or none of the above ?

Interesting that one of the Nico's was a philosopher & Pythagorean, considering those statues with Aristotle + Pythagoras at the Chartres Cathedral

1.Nicomachus (scribe) (c. 410 BC) a scribe tasked with publishing the laws of Solon

2. Nicomachus of Thebes (4th century BC) an ancient Greek painter

3.Nicomachus (father of Aristotle) (c. 375 BC) the father of the philosopher Aristotle

4.Nicomachus (son of Aristotle) (c. 325 BC) the son of the philosopher Aristotle

5.Nicomachus (c. 60 – c. 120) mathematician and Pythagorean philosopher

6. Caius Asinius Nicomachus Julianus (born c. 185) Proconsul in Asia in the 3rd century


#1 says Nico was a scribe who published the laws of Solon...Fomenko mentioned that Solon may have been the biblical Solomon.


Maybe interesting,maybe not was that Aristotle, unlike Plato and Socrates, was not originally from Athens.
http://www.historyforkids.org/learn/greeks/philosophy/aristotle.htm



And finally, perhaps something contrary to Fomenko's thinking OR a rebuke of the Vatican's secret archives:
Quote:
I accidentally came across a late (supposedly) 16th century name that counters Fomenko's notion that Europeans had not heard of Aristotle until the 19th century: GIORDANO BRUNO (1548, Nola – February 17, 1600, Rome).

(this was while re-reading the book "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science," page 196)

BRUNO OPPOSED ARISTOTLE. Bruno is primarily known for being burned at the stake by the Roman Inquisition in 1600 and is mistakenly thought of as the first scientific martyr for being a Copernican, but the fact is that he was burned at the stake for heresy that had nothing to do with science. His trial did not mention science whatsoever.

"Bruno was also a renegade monk, rumored to have declared Christ a rogue, all monks asses, and Catholic doctrine asinine."

"Behind his hostility," [John] Brooke added,"lay a conviction that the ROMAN CHURCH REPRESENTED A CORRUPTION OF AN EARLIER UNDEFILED RELIGION THAT HE ASSOCIATED WITH THE EGYPTIANS."

..............................................

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno
"In October 1585, after the French embassy in London was attacked by a mob, he returned to Paris with Castelnau, finding a tense political situation. Moreover, his 120 theses against Aristotelian natural science and his pamphlets against the mathematician Fabrizio Mordente soon put him in ill favor. In 1586, following a violent quarrel about Mordente's invention, "the differential compass," he left France for Germany.

Woodcut from "Articuli centum et sexaginta adversus huius tempestatis mathematicos atque philosophos," Prague 1588

In Germany he failed to obtain a teaching position at Marburg, but was granted permission to teach at Wittenberg, where he lectured on Aristotle for two years. However, with a change of intellectual climate there, he was no longer welcome, and went in 1588 to Prague, where he obtained 300 taler from Rudolf II, but no teaching position. He went on to serve briefly as a professor in Helmstedt, but had to flee again when he was excommunicated by the Lutherans, continuing the pattern of Bruno's gaining favor from lay authorities before falling foul of the ecclesiastics of whatever hue. "

.................................................................
SUMMARY OF THE TRIAL OF GIORANDO BRUNO AT THE VATICAN SECRET ARCHIVES:
http://asv.vatican.va/en/doc/1597.htm
....................................................................

So who's wrong with the chronology, Fomenko or the Vatican? Did Bruno really live in the late 16th century executed in 1600, or did the Vatican change the dates of a man who lived much, much later?

DID THE WORLD KNOW OF "GIORDANO BRUNO" BEFORE THE VATICAN REVEALED HIM IN THE "SECRET ARCHIVES" OR IS HE JUST A FIGMENT OF THEIR (or OUR) IMAGINATION?

HOW DOES THE WORLD KNOW THAT BRUNO KNEW OF ARISTOTLE?


The thread has a lot more musings/ramblings/possibilities.

---Crac

_________________
" 'New World Order' ?...same as the Old World Order "

Church of Crac motto:
"The End is Nigh. Give me a Dollar."


--Cracrocrates
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
THX



Joined: 16 Sep 2006
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2009 2:04 pm    Post subject: Christianity was first according to Fomenko? Reply with quote

I'm very interested in Fomenko's theories but after reading Chron1 there's a few points I find very hard to digest (tell me if this's been already discussed):

-He says Saint Mark lived on the XIth century A.D. (as Jesus) and at his death Saint Mark Cathedral was erected in his honour in Venice... which implies that within a few decades after Jesus's death Christianity has become so prominent as to have such important Cathedral erected in honour of one of Christ's disciples!?

-He takes for granted Jesus Christ as an historical figure. He seems versed in astrology but yet he gives real value to characters in the Bible, places, disciples, etc. (I thought he would be more prone to an astrotheological analysis)

-According to him every symbol used by Christianity has a Christian origin (for instance the Egyptian cross, the ankh) and Egyptian, Hindu and Buddist rituals and religions are kind of secuels of Christianity... This kind of leave behind important aspects about the evolution of myths and religion and lies very far from critics analysis that sees christianity as a syntesis of elements from various cults.

I don't know but I would say Christianity doesn't end up bad at all after Fomenko's earthquake!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cracrocrates



Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 269

PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2009 4:10 am    Post subject: Re: Christianity was first according to Fomenko? Reply with quote

THX wrote:
.. which implies that within a few decades after Jesus's death Christianity has become so prominent as to have such important Cathedral erected in honour of one of Christ's disciples!?

...
-He takes for granted Jesus Christ as an historical figure.
...
... This kind of leave behind important aspects about the evolution of myths and religion and lies very far from critics analysis that sees christianity as a syntesis of elements from various cults.

I don't know but I would say Christianity doesn't end up bad at all after Fomenko's earthquake!


It's been a while since I've been knee deep in alternative chronology, but here are some of my thoughts on your above post (from memory):

1. I think I was never satisfied with Fomenko's explanation on the origins OR purpose of Christianity (i think I said this in posts somewhere in this thread, probably more than once)

2. Keep in mind that Fomenko believes that the Old Testament was actually written AFTER the New Testament.

3. Fomenko has spent a lot of time on Jesus, including writing a book exclusively on him...but it's only in Russian as of now.

4. Re-re-re-reading Nineteen Eighty-Four reminds me that those Catholic cathedrals may have served any number of original purposes. Where they temples? Where they the capital of an imperial empire? Where they just gigantic shopping malls where merchants sold their wares protected from the weather? Maybe any or all of the above.

Honestly, the feeling in my gut is that all of known history has been filled with empires and oligarchical gangsters...meaning there has ALWAYS been censorship, and the origins of the bible (but not institutional Christianity/Catholicism) may have been coded stories to tell what actually happened. A lot of modern movies and novels (to me) have this feeling...how there is more truth in fiction than in the so-called "historical record"....though one needs the historical record for reference.

How else could any society accept stories with incest like daughters sleeping with their father as matter of fact (Moby) unless there was something else to them?

Or how come NONE of the most important people in the Bible wrote their own depictions, or the only point of reference is several hundred years later. Imagine if the only known accounts of George Washington were by ME written in 1999 several hundred years after his death. It boggles the mind...meaning its implausible, fiction serving a hidden purpose, or the record was altered to confusion.

Early in this thread, Jerry mentioned the peculiarities of Gutenberg's life. And from what I remember, the Catholic Church did not actually spread the Bible around in the early years...meaning it was something they wanted to keep restricted or secret.

...

So those are my rambling thoughts. But here's one more. George Orwell has a number of Christian references in 1984 including the names of London churches. But the reference that recently caught my eye was to Saint Sebastian (early in the book). Reads just like other Christian martyr stories, including the author of his life several generations later after Sebastian's death...in this case by (saint) Ambrose of Milan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Sebastian

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambrose_of_Milan

_________________
" 'New World Order' ?...same as the Old World Order "

Church of Crac motto:
"The End is Nigh. Give me a Dollar."


--Cracrocrates
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
alan12345



Joined: 24 Jun 2009
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 9:44 pm    Post subject: History fiction or science? Reply with quote

Quote:
1. I think I was never satisfied with Fomenko's explanation on the origins OR purpose of Christianity


The confusion arises, because Fomenko - although debunking standard chronology does present his new chronology within our known chronology, which is based as so many years after Jesus Christ (AD).
And then he places Jesus birth 1054 years later.

Since he does accept a historical Jesus Christ he probably would have been better of placing our modern date backwards. Taking the Middle Ages out (for which a lot can be said) then explaining why an institution as the papacy was influenced by the birth and death of Jesus Christ around the time of St. Francis of Assissi.

the displaces the origins of the papacy to before the birth of Christ. This will upset catholics, but there is a lot to be said in support of that. Through Linus (first Pope) grand father the papacy is the successor of Linus Grand father (Linus was son of Cataractus himself son of) the arch druid Bran the Blessed. the foundation of Rome is then a fusion between the heritage of Troyes and British Druidism. this was basically an atonement cult, which was not the same as the original jewish form of Christianity.

That form was Arianism and florished in France and in Eastern Europe. It is not of co-incidence that Francis of Assissi (Francis is the man from France) was of birth Morosini, a french jewish family relocated to Northern Italy near Venice.

In co-operation with Venice the catholic st. Dominic (sunday, whereas the Arians celebrated Sabbath on Saturda) defined all theology necessary to define an organisation as 'human person', needed for the catholic church to act 'in persona Christi'. Francis of Assissi then owed nothing, although his order as a 'person' could owe property.

This enabled later jesuits to implement a whole new form of Christianity, based on a ficticious person, in fact an enterprise. Gradually - although confessing a historical jesus - the catholic church through implementation of jesuitism would define this whole artificial contruction on a fictional jesus.

The real human flesh Jesus was completely put in the dark, namely by weaving the Middle Ages around the time of his birth.

there is a lot be said for placing Francis of Assissi and the Waldensers straight after the moving of the jews to France after the destruction of Jerusalem, whether that was Constantinopel or not.

there is also much to be said of the Papacy taking off in present Rome immediately after the period of the papacy in Avignon. Avignon was then a vehicle to first kidnap the Pope into France and then after 70 years letting him 'return' to Rome, whereas in fact it was a new start.

So far I can follow Fomenko....

_________________
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education (A. Einstein)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
atm



Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 3865

PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's who wrote it.

And it was not us then.

Now, however...

atm Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 16, 17, 18  Next
Page 17 of 18

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.