Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kibble for Thought: Dog diversity prompts new evolution theory
Science News ^ | 18 December 2004 | Christen Brownlee

Posted on 12/21/2004 8:45:42 AM PST by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-265 next last
To: Red Badger

Pygmies and Zulus could still meet in the middle, so to speak.

The definition of "species" is not willingness.

My wife's little yippy dog mates with a soccer ball all day long. They ain't the same species (although I always have an urge to kick both).

The prerequisite is: "Can they mate without artificial help?" If so, go to next test. If not, then not the same species.

Ergo, little yippy dogs and really big dogs are no longer the same species.


101 posted on 12/21/2004 10:17:26 AM PST by MeanWestTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

My mutt is half border collie, half purebred miniature Lab.

Just about the harriest beast I ever met, I found one of his hairs on the floor and it measured 14 inches.

My neighbor insists my hound is smarter and more likeable than alot of people he meets. At 13, he's doing fine.


102 posted on 12/21/2004 10:18:18 AM PST by djf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Modernman

"Interesting, but terribly disturbing."

Yep.


103 posted on 12/21/2004 10:18:48 AM PST by MeanWestTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
As the owner of both a dog and a cat, I've often marveled at how much easier their species would have survived if they could only have developed some ability to talk. If gives any animal a tremendous advantage in terms of survival that I don't understand why all animals didn't "evolve" this capability.
104 posted on 12/21/2004 10:22:57 AM PST by finnigan2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
I guess Carl Sagan murmuring "beeeeg baaaang beeeellions" is far more sensible? Faith is not ever going to be entirely sensible, but there is plenty to laugh at, and with high uproar and delight, when the Hans Vavink Protocol gets a head of steam. Und zen! hans waving frantically in air Beelyons of yars, zey happen! Und, vee gets ze eyes, ze ears, ze intellect, ze new and improved fruit flies!
105 posted on 12/21/2004 10:23:39 AM PST by Mamzelle (He's scared of me...! Honest, I won't hurt him!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle

WFT are you babbling about? While the origins and specifics of the Big Bang might be more than a little hazy, the evidence for it is pretty abundant (look up the work of Hubble). The evidence for evolution is even more abundant. We're now finding the genetic mechanisms that let it happen; we've understood the basic cause-and-effect principles of nature that drive it, and the fossils show the trail of it.

Wave your hands all you want. Rant all you want. Creationists will occupy the same hallowed ground as the hollow-earthers in the history books. If they persist, they will drag their religion down with them.


106 posted on 12/21/2004 10:28:20 AM PST by orionblamblam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan
Ergo, little yippy dogs and really big dogs are no longer the same species.

As a criterion of whether or not two creatures are of a different species, I believe the ability to mate refers to the genetic ability, not the physical ability, meaning can sperm from the one successfully fertilize the egg of the other (or however else the two organisms might reproduce). In the case of the dogs, the answer is clearly yes. Just because the "equipment" of the mastiff may be too large to fit that of the chihuahua, it doesn't make them different species. Besides, I'm willing to bet that if you left a male chihuahua and a female mastiff in a room for long enough, the chihuahua would find a way to make it happen.
107 posted on 12/21/2004 10:32:17 AM PST by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: finnigan2

Some cats do behave strangely. I had a couple watch "Forever Amber" on the television a few years ago. I thought that was strange because the both hated the book.


108 posted on 12/21/2004 10:34:05 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
You know, you evolutionists ought to evolve a sense of humor. "Hans Vavink" was what I picked up in a physics class once. The professor actually had a funny bone in his genetic makeup--he said, "When the theory starts falling apart, employ the Hans Vavink protocol to get you out of jam". When we looked at him questioningly, he started waving his hands in the air. I see this protocol applied in many discussions in FR conscerning the origin of mankind.

When your fruit flies won't evolve, just call the one who notices "superstitious"...

109 posted on 12/21/2004 10:34:59 AM PST by Mamzelle (He's scared of me...! Honest, I won't hurt him!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: finnigan2
They do talk, to each other. Cats and dogs have a well developed verbal and non verbal language to communicate with each other. The submissive tail posture, howling, etc. It is simplistic by our standards, but it is there. Not to mention they have a whole media that we are relatively blind to, scent.

Cats and Dogs both occupy the top tiers of the food chain for their niche. What advantage would they gain by refining their language more? They are already top predators. There probably wasn't any real competition for them until we came along. IMO
110 posted on 12/21/2004 10:40:22 AM PST by Wisconsin155 (newbie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King
My ridgeless RR was free. The breeder was going to put him to sleep but my brother (a vet) talked him out of it by telling him he would find homes for the ridgeless ones. Naturally he called his sister who never turned down the offer of a free dog. Best deal I ever made.
111 posted on 12/21/2004 10:42:31 AM PST by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
We're now finding the genetic mechanisms that let it happen; we've understood the basic cause-and-effect principles of nature that drive it, and the fossils show the trail of it.

Maaaan quit yippin'. Your theory has more holes than swiss cheese.

================

The Five Crises in Evolutionary Theory, by Dr. Ray Bohlin

Link

1. The unsubstantiation of a Darwinian mechanism of evolution

2. The total failure of origin of life studies to produce a workable model

3. The inability of evolutionary mechanism to explain the origin of complex adaptations

4. The bankruptcy of the blind watchmaker hypothesis

5. The biological evidence that the rule in nature is morphological stability over time and not constant change.

Raymond G. Bohlin is a graduate of the University of Illinois (B.S., zoology), North Texas State University (M.S., population genetics), and the University of Texas at Dallas (M.S., Ph.D., molecular biology)

===========================

No Speciation

Joseph Boxhorn, author of the talk-origins 'FAQ' on Speciation, makes a bold promise from the outset in his choice of title for his paper: 'Observed Instances of Speciation.' Any rational person visiting this site will naturally expect to find a list of cases where scientists, under controlled experimental conditions, have actually observed the process of speciation taking place.

However, anyone expecting to find such a list in Boxhorn's 'FAQ' is due for a major disappointment. It is true that Boxhorn does list a number of scientific observations, yet -- almost incredibly -- not a single one of these observations can be described as 'speciation' in the Darwinian sense, except by employing the kind of Double-Think used by officials at George Orwell's Ministry of Truth.

====================

Micro vs. Macro

Proponents of evolution often attempt to discredit creation by pointing to occurrences of microevolution, such as speciation, adaptation, etc. To the evolutionist, microevolution is vindication for their belief in the much larger macroevolution. Their belief is that if these microevolutionary changes have enough time to accumulate, then eventually this will lead to a macroevolutionary change. And therefore, in their way of thinking, if microevolution is a well established fact, macroevolution must logically be an established fact as well.

====================

Intelligent Design — Intro

112 posted on 12/21/2004 10:45:05 AM PST by Michael_Michaelangelo (The best theory is not ipso facto a good theory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan
The prerequisite is: "Can they mate without artificial help?" If so, go to next test. If not, then not the same species.

I think you should probably rethink your test with special consideration given to Pfizer.

113 posted on 12/21/2004 10:46:21 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle

One of my sons said he could breathe underwater, and the others thought he was evolving, but we concluded that he's really a space alien.


114 posted on 12/21/2004 10:48:54 AM PST by Tax-chick (Jesus is the reason for the season which begins at sundown on December 24.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
re: The prerequisite is: "Can they mate without artificial help?" )))

Does this mean Viagra has brought about a new human species? I mean, talk about your artificial help...

115 posted on 12/21/2004 10:50:43 AM PST by Mamzelle (He's scared of me...! Honest, I won't hurt him!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
Best deal I ever made.

Sounds like it!

116 posted on 12/21/2004 10:51:53 AM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

LOL. But, alas, not my test. It's in every Bio 101 text book.

And, with the horse answer above, in normal conditions, humans can normally mate without the help of little pills, so they are the same species, even if help is sometimes used.

If not, I would be of a different species than a democrat, as I would not consider mating with one without the help of tequila.


117 posted on 12/21/2004 10:53:20 AM PST by MeanWestTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
I would think naive would be a better description.

Now to address your strawman argument about the fruit fly. Evolution is a gradual change. You can not wait around for it to happen in our timeline and then say, "well didn't happen, your wrong". The fossil record is the only way to witness the changes. There are plenty of transitional fossils that prove the point, if you bothered to look it up. But again, just because evolution is true, does not prove or disprove God. Why you creationist types continue to fabricate unscientific babble, simply to preserve your precious dogma, is beyond my understanding
118 posted on 12/21/2004 10:55:45 AM PST by Wisconsin155 (newbie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

So...this has something to do with Typing Dogs......?


119 posted on 12/21/2004 10:56:16 AM PST by PoorMuttly ("The right of the People to be Muttly shall not be infringed,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
Creationists will occupy the same hallowed ground as the hollow-earthers in the history books. If they persist, they will drag their religion down with them.

That's a silly statement. How can someone bring down his religion by believing in it?

The evidence for evolution is far from conclusive. In fact, research in the field these days seems to punch as many holes in the theory as it does patch them. For me, the greatest flaw in the theory is that, as an explanation for how existing life got on this planet, it necessarily points to spontaneous generation of life. Now, I know that most proponents of evolutionary theory say that spontaneous generation isn't part of the theory, that it only covers what happens to organisms once they already existed, but unless a theory accompanies evolution to explain that, evolution is starkly incomplete.

And by the way, the idea of spontaneous generation of life, to me, is a ridiculous concept. I won't go as far as to say that it is completely impossible, but I would find the possibility of a Creator to be far more likely.
120 posted on 12/21/2004 11:00:17 AM PST by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle

> When your fruit flies won't evolve, just call the one who notices "superstitious"...

Uh-huh. A good example of replacing critical thinking with blind faith. Bravo.


121 posted on 12/21/2004 11:01:15 AM PST by orionblamblam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Conspiracy Guy

I know that is what my Weim was originally bred to do, but unfortunately she flunked out of obedience school...3 times!


122 posted on 12/21/2004 11:03:00 AM PST by Weimdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Rakkasan1
What is your cat doing with it's paw?

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

123 posted on 12/21/2004 11:03:10 AM PST by expatguy ("Fallujah Delenda Est!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Don't forget the Freemasons...


124 posted on 12/21/2004 11:04:32 AM PST by Pharmboy (Listen...you can still hear the old media sobbing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak

> How can someone bring down his religion by believing in it?

Because you are focussing on the fairy-tale, allegorical aspects of it and demanding that it be seen as scientific truth. Creatinists are making it *very* easy to dismiss Christians as a whole as a bunch of uneducated superstitious boobs. It is a slow process, but it's certain death for a religion to be laughed at.

> The evidence for evolution is far from conclusive.

No, it's not. It's quite conclusive. The only real debates left are the details.

> it necessarily points to spontaneous generation of life.

Defien your terms. At what point to complex chemicals become "life" in your view? Is a virus "alive" if so, scientists have assembled synthetic virii from much simpler components. The virus was as alive as virii get, and was able to reproduce.


125 posted on 12/21/2004 11:05:36 AM PST by orionblamblam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan
Here's a better test. If the male chihuahua has illicit sex with the toilet seat and the female mastiff's love canal contacts the chihuahua's seed on the toilet seat, can an egg be fertilized?

That was in my Philosophy 101 book. :-}

126 posted on 12/21/2004 11:06:33 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
Is a virus "alive" if so, scientists have assembled synthetic virii from much simpler components.

You don't see that this statement argues against your spontaneous generation point?

127 posted on 12/21/2004 11:07:42 AM PST by Tax-chick (Jesus is the reason for the season which begins at sundown on December 24.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

No, it does not. What scientists do is not magic, not supernatural. They brought chemical componants together in the right environment, and the end result was a living virus.


128 posted on 12/21/2004 11:09:28 AM PST by orionblamblam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
It is a slow process, but it's certain death for a religion to be laughed at.

Hmmm. Wonder why Christianity has done so well throughout history when so many of its adherents faced not only laughter but certain death for their beliefs. If your assessment above is any indication of your ability to assess facts and evidence, well, guess we know who is more likely to subscribe to a fairy tale.

129 posted on 12/21/2004 11:10:37 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak

I see no conflict in evolution and Creationism.

I suspect the evolutionists have it a little wrong, and I suspect the creationists are reading the Bible a little wrong.

I bet it will shake out that: God, the law-giver, created laws of nature. These shake out to be evolution in some form or fasion.

The result is consistent with Intelligent Design. Indeed, anyone who bake bread and does it just right creates something out of seeming chaos.

God spinkled in just the right ingredients in the Universe and baked us up just how he wanted. He knew exactly how the bread would rise.

The Bible is the recipe.
Evolution is the science of the rising bread (from the perspective of the yeast, no less).

I recall very asute readers of prophecy being very surprised by Christ coming along. They expected a military hero, I believe.

They read their Bible wrong. In hindsight, their error could not be more obvious.

Same with the Church going after Galileo. They relied on the Bible (and their pre-existing beliefs) to say Galelio was all wet for his Earth-is-Sphere-that-goes-around-the-Sun theory. Got him excommunicated, in fact.

Knowing what I know now, when I read Genesis, it seem perfectly consistent with the Earth going around the Sun, although I see how someone could take it differently.

Once the details are worked out, I bet it will all harmonize, as well.

(Take this all with a grain of salt. The Big Bang theory always sounded like God saying "Let there be light . . ." to me.)


130 posted on 12/21/2004 11:13:07 AM PST by MeanWestTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: expatguy

scratching himself like a baseball player

either that or practicing for a superbowl half time show


131 posted on 12/21/2004 11:13:28 AM PST by Rakkasan1 (Justice of the Piece: Hope IS on the way...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
No, it does not. What scientists do is not magic, not supernatural.

To bastardize Arthur C. Clarke's saying: To the desperately deliberately ignorant, any technology is seen as magic. Evil, competing magic.

132 posted on 12/21/2004 11:14:17 AM PST by balrog666 (The invisible and the nonexistent look very much alike.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

I think that was written on the inside door of a stall outside the Philosophy building, too.

There was even a phone number.


133 posted on 12/21/2004 11:14:54 AM PST by MeanWestTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam

Reminds me of the joke:

God and a scientist arguing about the creation of life.

The scientist says, "I bet I can make a virus out of this dirt."

To which God replies, "I'll take the bet. But you have to use your own dirt."


134 posted on 12/21/2004 11:16:59 AM PST by MeanWestTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew

> Wonder why Christianity has done so well throughout history when so many of its adherents faced not only laughter but certain death for their beliefs.

Because Christinaity had political power. Jsut a few hundred years ago, anyone who would DARE suggest somethign like evolution would be burned at the stake.

But now, Christianity is fading from the western world. It's power in Europe, formerly the central base of Christianity, is quite weak. Christians who bray nonsense about Creationism do NOT help their cause.


135 posted on 12/21/2004 11:19:30 AM PST by orionblamblam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
The virus was as alive as virii get, and was able to reproduce.

If you isolate virii in the marriage suite from other organisms how do they reproduce?

136 posted on 12/21/2004 11:20:23 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan; jwalsh07
Are Chihuahuas and Great Danes the same species?
137 posted on 12/21/2004 11:21:10 AM PST by RedWhiteBlue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: djf

All my dogs are smarter and more likeable than a lot of people I meet......!especially liberals!......


138 posted on 12/21/2004 11:21:30 AM PST by Red Badger (If the Red States are JESUSLAND, then the Blue States are SATANLAND......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Michael_Michaelangelo

> Maaaan quit yippin'.

Translation: "Please stop telling people the truth."

> Your theory has more holes than swiss cheese.

All theories have holes. However, Creationism is nothign *but* a hole.

The stuff you copied-and-pasted was amusing, but not enlightening except to show what depths of intellectual dishonesty Creationists will go to.


139 posted on 12/21/2004 11:22:43 AM PST by orionblamblam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
What scientists do is not magic, not supernatural.

Quite so. What scientist do, ideally, is intelligent manipulation of pre-existing materials.

140 posted on 12/21/2004 11:23:56 AM PST by Tax-chick (Jesus is the reason for the season which begins at sundown on December 24.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: RedWhiteBlue

You don't have to convince me. Hell, even the French Poodle can breed with the German Shephard. You get bull fascists with their paws up.


141 posted on 12/21/2004 11:25:48 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
Because Christinaity had political power.

If you want to call following some guy who was put to death on a cross "political power" that's your prerogative. To me it looks like sheer weakness. But then, I tend to look at the evidence differently than you.

142 posted on 12/21/2004 11:29:21 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Four men were bragging about how smart their dogs were.

One man was an engineer, the second man was an accountant,
the third man was a chemist, and the fourth was a
government worker.

To show off, the engineer called to his dog. "T-square,
do your stuff." T-square trotted over to a desk, took out
some paper and a pen, and promptly drew a circle, a
square, and a triangle.

Everyone agreed that that was pretty smart.

The accountant said that his dog could do better. He
called to his dog and said, "Spreadsheet, do your stuff."
Spreadsheet went out into the kitchen and returned with a
dozen cookies. He divided them into four equal piles of
three cookies each.

Everyone agreed that that was good.

The chemist said that his dog could do better still. He
called to his dog and said, "Measure, do your stuff."
Measure got up, walked over to the fridge, took out a
quart of milk, got a ten-ounce glass from the cupboard,
and poured exactly eight ounces without spilling a drop.

Everyone agreed that that was pretty impressive.

Then the three men turned to the government worker and
said, "What can your dog do?"

The government worker called to his dog and said, "Coffee
Break, do your stuff." Coffee Break jumped to his feet,
ate the cookies, drank the milk, claimed he had injured
his back while doing so, filed a grievance report for
unsafe working conditions, put in for workers'
compensation, and went home for the rest of the day on
sick leave.

They all agreed that that was brilliant!


143 posted on 12/21/2004 11:30:03 AM PST by oyez (¡Qué viva la revolución de Reagan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

> What scientist do, ideally, is intelligent manipulation of pre-existing materials.

Yes. Sometimes it takes intelligence to create an experiment that reflects a natural setting. But the fact that intelligence is required to create a nature-replicating experiment does not in the slightest imply that intelligence is required in the natural setting itself.


144 posted on 12/21/2004 11:32:18 AM PST by orionblamblam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: oyez

I know someone who is EXACTLY like that dog, and she IS a Government worker!......


145 posted on 12/21/2004 11:35:06 AM PST by Red Badger (If the Red States are JESUSLAND, then the Blue States are SATANLAND......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
But the fact that intelligence is required to create a nature-replicating experiment does not in the slightest imply that intelligence is required in the natural setting itself.

Perhaps, perhaps not, but the fact that intelligence has been unable to produce matter, energy and the laws of physics ex nihilo or even offer a rational explanation of same does imply a unique being capable of such wondrous creation.

146 posted on 12/21/2004 11:36:19 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Michael_Michaelangelo
Typical, half truths and strawman arguments. The only reason nonsense like this gets real attention, is the scientific illiteracy of the American public. Claiming that evolution is full of holes, does not mean your theory, what ever that is, has any validity. Further, speciation is found extensively in lower order animals, insects and birds in particular. A browse over any encyclopedia would tell you that. I love how creationists have no understanding of what terms like Speciation mean, yet are willing to debate them with extreme fervor.

http://www.micro.utexas.edu/courses/levin/bio304/evolution/speciation.html

http://eebweb.arizona.edu/faculty/venable/Papers/pnas99.pdf

Yes, this whole evolution thing is simply a mass world conspiracy. I suppose you should start a letter writing campaign to Notre Dame, Northwestern, etc and tell them that they better drop their evolutionary science program, because creationist have all the answers. Prove your ID theory by positive example, not just negative argument or appealing to authority, and I might take you seriously.
147 posted on 12/21/2004 11:40:19 AM PST by Wisconsin155 (newbie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
a nature-replicating experiment

How do they know it's a "nature-replicating experiment"? Nobody was there to observe the conditions under which, in theory, viruses spontaneously generated from some non-living substance. Circular reasoning.

148 posted on 12/21/2004 11:43:07 AM PST by Tax-chick (Jesus is the reason for the season which begins at sundown on December 24.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

> does imply a unique being capable of such wondrous creation.

Does it? How?

Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean that there's some magic being behind it.


149 posted on 12/21/2004 11:45:29 AM PST by orionblamblam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: orionblamblam
Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean that there's some magic being behind it.

LOL. Keep telling yourself that, it will warm you on these cold winter nights.

150 posted on 12/21/2004 11:49:01 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-265 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson