Sciencescience

Fri May 4, 2018, 03:22 PM

Homo naledi had Lucy-Like Hips


BY TIM CLAREY, PH.D. * | MONDAY, APRIL 16, 2018

Hips can reveal many things about fossilized organisms, especially when it comes to mammals. They can indicate the difference between species and even reveal the differences between the sexes of the same species.

Last fall, we reported on the latest research findings that showed Homo naledi was less human-like and more Australopith-like. ICR concluded that the small-brained Homo naledi was just another Lucy-like ape—similar to a modern chimpanzee.1

Another study, recently published in the Journal of Human Evolution, examined Homo naledi’s hips.2 The authors compared the hips to other known ape and human species and their results were consistent with ICR’s understanding, but unexpected to evolutionists.2

Lee Berger, Homo naledi’s discoverer, recruited Caroline VanSickle and about 30 other scientists to study different aspects of the fossils. The team assigned to study the hips came from the University of Wisconsin, University of Witwatersrand, Vassar College, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (Madrid, Spain), New York University, and Duke University.

VanSickle, from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and her colleagues pieced together roughly 40 pelvic fragments, from at least four individuals to make their best attempt at solving the pelvic issue.2 All of these fragments came from the Dinaledi Chamber in South Africa, where Berger made his initial discovery.3

VanSickle says, “The downside is that the Homo naledi fragments are far less complete than fossils from other sites, so figuring out how they fit together and what they mean for how Homo naledi walked or gave birth is much more difficult.”4

The team found a flared ilium (the upper hip bone) that widens to the side. This shape of ilium is only found in other australopith species.2

“This is bizarrely Lucy-like.” Tweet: “This is bizarrely Lucy-like.”

Homo naledi had Lucy-Like Hips: http://www.icr.org/article/homo-naledi-lucy-hips/

@icrscience

“You don’t see this flared an ilium in later hominins,” VanSickle commented. “This is bizarrely Lucy-like.”4

Though this species has been attributed to Homo based on cranial and lower limb morphology, the morphology of some of the fragmentary pelvic remains recovered align more closely with specimens attributed to the species Australopithecus afarensis and Australopithecus africanus than they do with those of most (but not all) known species of the genus Homo.2

These findings are consistent with earlier analyses of the post-cranial aspects of Homo naledi, including the vertebrae and hips that also indicate that Homo naledi most closely resembles an australopith.1 And the brain size to body mass analysis performed by O’Micks also showed the close resemblance of Homo naledi to the australopiths.5 VanSickle and her co-authors concluded,

If found on their own, the pelvic remains from Homo naledi could easily be mistaken for those of an australopith based on their small size and laterally flared ilia, along with the fact that their only ‘Homo-like’ features overlap with A. sediba.2

Homo naledi was not human—just another extinct ape. Tweet: Homo naledi was not human—just another extinct ape.

Homo naledi had Lucy-Like Hips: http://www.icr.org/article/homo-naledi-lucy-hips/

@icrscience

Homo naledi was not human—just another extinct ape.


References

Clarey, T. 2017. Just What Is Homo naledi? Acts & Facts. 46 (12): 9.
VanSickle, C. et al. 2017. Homo naledi pelvic remains from the Dinaledi Chamber, South Africa, Journal of Human Evolution. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2017.10.001
Berger, L. R. et al. 2015. Homo naledi, a new species of the genus Homo from the Dinaledi Chamber, South Africa. eLife. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.09560
Devitt, T. 2017. Hip Heaven. University of Wisconsin-Madison News.
O'Micks, J. 2017. Likely Discontinuity Between Humans and Non-Human Hominins Based on Endocranial Volume and Body Mass with a Special Focus on Homo naledi—A Short Analysis. Answers Research Journal. 10: 241-243.

52 replies, 1449 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 52 replies Author Time Post
Reply Homo naledi had Lucy-Like Hips (Original post)
nolidad May 2018 OP
Da Mannn May 2018 #1
Jack Burton May 2018 #2
Steelydamned May 2018 #3
rampartb May 2018 #4
nolidad May 2018 #5
SatansSon666 May 2018 #6
nolidad May 2018 #7
SatansSon666 May 2018 #8
nolidad May 2018 #9
SatansSon666 May 2018 #10
nolidad May 2018 #15
SatansSon666 May 2018 #17
nolidad May 2018 #25
SatansSon666 May 2018 #26
nolidad May 2018 #27
SatansSon666 May 2018 #28
nolidad May 2018 #29
SatansSon666 May 2018 #31
SatansSon666 May 2018 #11
nolidad May 2018 #12
SatansSon666 May 2018 #13
nolidad May 2018 #14
SatansSon666 May 2018 #16
nolidad May 2018 #18
SatansSon666 May 2018 #19
nolidad May 2018 #20
SatansSon666 May 2018 #21
nolidad May 2018 #22
SatansSon666 May 2018 #23
nolidad May 2018 #24
nolidad May 2018 #30
SatansSon666 May 2018 #32
nolidad May 2018 #33
SatansSon666 May 2018 #34
nolidad May 2018 #35
SatansSon666 May 2018 #36
oflguy May 2018 #37
SatansSon666 May 2018 #38
oflguy May 2018 #39
SatansSon666 May 2018 #40
oflguy May 2018 #41
SatansSon666 May 2018 #42
oflguy May 2018 #43
SatansSon666 May 2018 #44
oflguy May 2018 #45
SatansSon666 May 2018 #46
nolidad May 2018 #47
nolidad May 2018 #48
SatansSon666 May 2018 #49
nolidad May 2018 #50
SatansSon666 May 2018 #51
nolidad May 2018 #52

Response to nolidad (Original post)

Fri May 4, 2018, 03:40 PM

1. just another chimp. Yawn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Fri May 4, 2018, 03:45 PM

2. Hips don't lie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Fri May 4, 2018, 05:42 PM

4. some more work with homo naledi

there are a lot of h naledi bones in that cave, but the place is very hard to get to (the actual digging is done by very small, thin, athletic girls). the cave was likely used for burial for many generations. current thinking is that they are a little over 200,000 years old.

"Notably, there are some things that these fossils won’t change: 1) We are indeed the product of evolution (I’m anticipating some of the comments on this post inevitably challenging evolution. Sorry guys, the evidence is incontrovertible and the fact that scientists change their minds as to the details when new discoveries are made speaks to the strength of the scientific process, not the weakness of the theory). 2) Humans originated in Africa, 3) There were multiple kinds of hominins co-existing for much of human evolution, 4) Humans are likely descended from H. erectus, with subsequent ancestry from some of the other kinds of hominins (Denisovans, Neanderthals, and probably others)."

dna of modern europeans shares some dna with neanderthals, dna of some modern asians shares some dna with denisovans. i think they are still working on the naledi genome.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/may/23/homo-naledi-genome-will-we-ever-find-this-elusive-key-to-human-evolution

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rampartb (Reply #4)

Sat May 5, 2018, 06:45 AM

5. Rampart you are funny.

The evidence is incontrovertible- yet the evidence is what keeps causing them to rewrite all the textbooks!

See the devil is in the details here! We have no solid intermediaries between genus and families! We have supposition and ideas but no way to validate them! How is that incontrovertible!

Just remember this:

Raptor to bird is now a "fact" according to the evolutionary community of scientists. Yet they cannot preset the evidence that supports this fact!

Sorry but if creationists did this- evolutionists would be howling more than a wolf bays at the moon!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #5)

Sat May 5, 2018, 09:00 PM

6. Nobody is rewriting textbooks.

Updating and adding to the current knowledge isn't rewriting anything.
But you just keep on believing that.
Lmao

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #6)

Sun May 6, 2018, 01:57 PM

7. Well when the rewrites come out

how homo naledi is actually australopithecus naledi- I will await to see how you live in denial of it!

You have become so entranced- you seem to forget one little fact- when new information contradicts old- it is not adding to knowledge already there- it is rewriting it because the old knowledge was wrong!!!!

The new trend I know is to have no rights and wrongs (except if you are a Christian then you are always wrong),

but it still is there! When something new contradicts something old like Naledi has- the old is wrong!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #7)

Sun May 6, 2018, 03:13 PM

8. If the paleontologists want to call it that

They can call it that.
I really don't give a shit. It certainly doesn't disprove evolution and it certainly doesn't disprove paleontology.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #8)

Mon May 7, 2018, 06:22 AM

9. I agree it doesn't disprove evolution

it does nothing to prove evolution. We still have 0 intermediaries from our ancient supposed ape ancestor and homo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #9)

Mon May 7, 2018, 08:02 AM

10. We have several.

Creationists just won't qccept them.
They asked for Lucy. They got Lucy, they deny Lucy. There are even more now but you'll never accept it, you already said nothing will change your mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #10)

Sun May 13, 2018, 02:00 PM

15. Lucy is full australopithecus or southern ape.

she is not an intermediary between men and ape. Despite how the paleo artists decided to make her look in museums.

Once again teh terminology with A. Afarenses is: thought, may have, could be, suggests. That is not science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #15)

Mon May 14, 2018, 07:31 AM

17. Because you and Brian Thomas M.S. say so?

I'll take the word of the people studying their entire lives to solve these mysteries over a failed biotechnology loser and some dude that believes everything he writes in his little blog.

That is exactly science. Science never deals in absolutes like that. They know something could come up that changes what they thought they knew about things. Then they modify theirnfindeingnto reflect that. You have absolutely no experience doing any type of scientific research for any reason. Yet, you claim to know what they do and why they do it.
I have research experience, I know how the scientific community operates. I have several friends from university who are making new discoveries all the time. I have even seen their names pop up in references by your Brian Thomas M.S. loon and as much ad they hate when assholes like him misinterpret and fuck up their research they have to laugh at how fucking stupid they are. Reading their papers and coming up with shit that makes no sense out of it. It's incredibly dumb and dishonest to behave like those fucking loons do. Yet, there are still people so wrapped up in their world of make-believe that they take their word for whatever they say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #17)

Mon May 21, 2018, 06:51 AM

25. Not me and Thomas

But almost teh entire scientific community! Maybe you should read the papewrs you claim to read and get a real education!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #25)

Mon May 21, 2018, 07:25 AM

26. Calling me uneducated on the topic

Doesn't make it so.
Brian Thomas is a fucking loon. That we know for sure.
We know he reads a paper, looks for a discrepancy or anything that may prove his point, ignores everything else including updated research and writes a little blog that you believe without question.
Then instead of researching the actual papers, reading the references in those papers or being capable of criticizing the loons, you come here and post it like some revelation has just occurred. It's fucking ridiculous.
You suck at science because you have learned how to research and experiment from other people who suck at science.
You can do better than those loons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #26)

Tue May 22, 2018, 04:35 PM

27. Well you are uneducated on the topic.

Simply accusing Thomas of being a loon and misrepresenting in his reporting doesn't make it so. You are just too lazy to show what you allege.

You don't even know the scientists at ICR and make your glaringly false allegations at things you know nothing about! a typical cornered person who can't defend their position in light of others revelation.

Its too bad you don't read his articles cuz he heavily references the sources he read. He cites numerous believers in evolution and their conclusions. See unlike you he has nothing to hide!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #27)

Wed May 23, 2018, 04:03 AM

28. He usually references the main paper.

That's it. Then most of his other references are other creationist blogs and random bullshit.
He sucks. He scours journals looking for shit to confirm his beliefs, he's not interested in the science, just trying to make science look bad because if you can make science look bad,it's a point for god or some stupid shit.
You can do better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #28)

Wed May 23, 2018, 06:38 PM

29. Once again you show your lack of integrity and willingness to lie for you ego!

1. You don't know what he does- just impose on him your own hate fro Christians

2. He cited four major sources not just the kmain article (though the main research paper should be enough)

3. You have no been able to refute any of his cites as being misrepresentations.

4. He is not trying to make science look bad- just the belief system known as evolution. And that is not hard to do as it goes against so many things that are verified by science.

5. They make real science look good! See unlike yourself, they really believe in the scientific method of establishing scientific "facts".

6. I challenge you to show me one major event of "Darwinian " evolution that has been verified by the scientific method. Or will you come up with another one of your many lame excuses why you will not????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #29)

Thu May 24, 2018, 04:02 AM

31. Every relevant field of science confirms evolution.

Most people know this.
Except creationists because they would rather pretend.
Like Snelling. He wrote a paper on rock formations that he, himself, determined to be billions of years old, but at the same time he was also working for what would later become Answers in Genesis and was writing articles saying the world is 6000 years old, simply because he believes the bible says so. He sends one paper for peer review while writing for AiG saying the opposite.
He would rather pretend than show what he knows to be true. You can't get any more dishonest than that. They are all like that and you believe them. Why? Because you would rather pretend as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Wed May 9, 2018, 09:38 AM

11. ICR is so loony that they think

Having more ape-like hips with more human-like arms and legs isn't evidence of a transitional form. They more worried about it's name than what it actually is.
Lmao..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #11)

Thu May 10, 2018, 08:43 AM

12. Well my benighted foe.

The ones declaring this another extinct ancient ape are evolutionary paleontologists!

ICR is just reporting on what evolutionists declared!

Letting your hatred blind you to glaring facts is sad!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #12)

Thu May 10, 2018, 08:45 AM

13. Ape or homo

Doesn't really matter.. the harder it is to define, the more transitional it is. Not quite human not quite ape. That's the definition of transitional species.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #13)

Sun May 13, 2018, 01:57 PM

14. Not at all.

All it was is that the more they were able to study the fossils- the clearer the picture got and then they realized it was misclassified!

Calling it homo was simply rushing to press with info that wasn't right!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #14)

Sun May 13, 2018, 09:15 PM

16. Misclassified?

Because you and Brian Thomas M.S. say so?
It's still classified as homo so what info do you and Brian Thomas M.S. have for them that would change their minds?
Science reclassifies things so why wouldn't they do it with this. Science is fine with being wrong and correcting errors when they are shown to be wrong. Not the ICR loons though. They are never wrong, but they've never been right either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #16)

Tue May 15, 2018, 06:28 AM

18. No because the paleo biologists who did further research

said so!

All Thomas did was report on what their research produced. And you would have known that if you read the article.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #18)

Tue May 15, 2018, 06:31 AM

19. So, he didn't do anything.

Figures.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #19)

Thu May 17, 2018, 06:50 AM

20. Now you are whining because he is reporting

finds from evolutionists you don't like!

If he did the research you would just fluff it off as coming from an ICR loon anyway. So your complaints are given their due place- in the nations septic system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #20)

Thu May 17, 2018, 07:42 AM

21. He's writing an shitty article

And giving his opinions on what should happen when he isn't trained or have any background at all to be saying anything other than his biased ridiculous opinion.
That's all the ICR articles are. Opinion pieces.
Reading a couple of papers, looking for uncertainty and making mountains out of molehills isn't being scientific.
Brian Thomas M.S. should he fired, he really sucks at research.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #21)

Fri May 18, 2018, 08:26 AM

22. His conclusions are.opinions based on his belief that God is creator.

The rest of the article is reporting on what was found or discovered and writing on it!

Thomas is not writing research papers (now I wonder if you know what a research paper looks like), butr being a reporter and reporting on scientific news and giving the necessary references to validate his article.

Of course you will think he is incompetent! To give him any validity would go against your personality.

BTW-- maybe you should look at the article. You will find Thomas was not the author!

But I offer you the opportunity to show one error in Clarey's article! YOu talk big- now here is your chance to show that Clarey is wrong in anything he wrote in this article. You talk big- now can you walk the walk????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #22)

Fri May 18, 2018, 10:06 AM

23. So his opinion is shit and doesn't belong in science forum.

It belongs in beliefs.
At least you admit he is biased and starts off with his conclusion and looks for supporting evidence, the opposite of science and research.
He researches an article and writes a blog post. He's a fucking loon. Zero credibility. I could do a better job than him plus I'm more qualified.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #23)

Fri May 18, 2018, 02:36 PM

24. No he is reporting

facts published by evolutionists that trashed the original findings of other evolutionists.

He writes in ICR because he believes the evidence points to god creating.

But if you had bothered to read the article you would have seen He did not mention god once. Just reported the science.

You are an extraordinary lazy debater.

Evolution is just as much belief as creation.

They have not proven any of the major tenets of evolutionary dogma yet.

You can't even show scales to feathers but keep dodging the fact scales could never turn to feathers by a whole bunch of pathetic rescue devices for which you offer not one scintilla of proof for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #11)

Wed May 23, 2018, 06:41 PM

30. Well as the Paleontologists and paleobiologists that researched the bones

have concluded that the human bones were most likely carried into the caves by opportunistic predators!

There is not a complete skeleton there. To make a full scale skeleton they had to use remains from what they believe was over 20 differing individuals.

And the researchers concluded homo naledi was just another extinct ape and not an intermediary!

So whine all you want- it is your side denying naledi is a transition

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #30)

Thu May 24, 2018, 04:08 AM

32. There is no evidence

In the Dinaledi chamber of anything like that.
No scratch marks on bones, not scattered about, no other remains in there. No evidence at all for what you are saying. Maybe the other site does, but not the Dinaledi chamber.
You are completely wrong and that's why you won't admit it in the other thread. Instead you make shit up, like the loons at ICR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #32)

Fri May 25, 2018, 06:33 AM

33. Take it up with the people who did the research

and wrote teh papers who are not from ICR.

I already posted the link, go look it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #33)

Fri May 25, 2018, 07:44 AM

34. The paper you are referring to doesn't say what you think it does.

The people weren't the actual researchers. They used their data in their model to try to see if it was in concordance with deliberate burial.
What other animals did they find in the dinaledi chamber?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to nolidad (Reply #35)

Fri May 25, 2018, 10:36 AM

36. Yeah, the cave mice must have drug them in there.



It also doesn't negate the fact that the paper you are referring to doesn't say any of that and is a model for dispersion of bones.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #36)

Fri May 25, 2018, 10:47 AM

37. I am convinced that SatansSon is nolidad

Think about it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #37)

Fri May 25, 2018, 10:54 AM

38. Lol. .

I couldn't act like that if I was being paid to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #38)

Fri May 25, 2018, 11:01 AM

39. Right

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #39)

Fri May 25, 2018, 11:02 AM

40. In fact I'd probably feel more confortable

Acting like a gay cowboy in brokeback mountain 2 than I would acting as a creationist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #40)

Fri May 25, 2018, 11:04 AM

41. Right

Its obvious

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #41)

Fri May 25, 2018, 11:16 AM

42. Sorry bud. Yer wrong.

I can't prove it to you. So you just believe whatever the fuck you want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #42)

Fri May 25, 2018, 11:21 AM

43. I think very strongly that I am right

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #43)

Fri May 25, 2018, 11:27 AM

44. That's fine. You aren't though.

Maybe try to devise some type of test or experiment where I can prove it to you.
I PM him before, because I was out of line about telking him he was abusing children and told him I wouldn't accuse him of that anymore because it wasn't fair. He thanked me.

This was months ago, you'll probably say I did it preemptively in case I got caught or something..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #44)

Fri May 25, 2018, 11:36 AM

45. methinks you doeth protest too much

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #45)

Fri May 25, 2018, 11:45 AM

46. Well.. devise a test where we can prove it to you.

If you can't, then believe whatever the fuck you want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #37)

Sat May 26, 2018, 11:17 AM

47. I would be suicidal with a personality like that!!!!

Even if it is only pretend!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #36)

Sat May 26, 2018, 11:18 AM

48. RE read and this time when you are awake and can pay attention.

You love to strain at gnats but not see the camels running you over!

Three evolutionist believing sites say there are animal bones and you have to find some way to try to wiggle out of your lies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #48)

Mon May 28, 2018, 04:57 AM

49. Nothing relevant.

A handful of mice and birds.l that found there way in over the hundreds of thousands of years the bones were there.
There are probably spiders in there too.. lmao.
That's wasn't the point and you know it.
There is no other reason for naledi fossils to be there other than deliberate placement.
They can't prove that yet, but that's what that model was trying to explain.
Mice and birds that could have gotten there any time after, did not bring homo naledi into that chamber.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #49)

Mon May 28, 2018, 05:30 PM

50. Well take it up with your evolutionary buddies.

They are the ones who said the human bones appear to be imported into the cave.

It was the evolutionary loons you have a problem with not ICR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #50)

Mon May 28, 2018, 06:06 PM

51. "Loon" is my thing. Try to get an original thought once in a while.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #51)

Tue May 29, 2018, 06:33 AM

52. ....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Sciencescience