Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

User talk:Touchedbyabear

2007-03-23T21:30:25Z

Touchedbyabear:

Your edit to the elephant page is silly and considered vandalism. Please do not make any more edits of the sort. ~ [[User:SharonS|SharonS]] [[User talk:SharonS|Talk!]] 17:21, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

What was silly about it? I knew an elephant that was 73, but the page said 70. Im soory if you think that I am not being sincere. [[User:touchedbyabear|touchedbyabear]]

Elephant

2007-03-23T21:05:31Z

Touchedbyabear: removed vandalism

The '''elephant''' (Elephantidae) belongs to the family of pachyderm, and the only remaining family in the order Proboscidea in the class Mammalia. Elephantidae has three living species: the African Bush Elephant, the African Forest Elephant (until recently known collectively as the African Elephant), and the Asian Elephant (also known as the Indian Elephant).

Elephants are mammals, and the largest land animals alive today. The elephant's gestation period is 22 months, the longest of any land animal, although the blue whale is larger. Some people incorrectly believe that the blue whale once walked on land. At birth it is common for an elephant calf to weigh 120 kg (265 lb). An elephant may live as long as 73 years, sometimes longer. The largest elephant ever recorded was shot in Angola in 1956. It was male and weighed about 12,000 kg (26,400 lb), with a shoulder height of 4.2m, a meter taller than the average male African elephant.

Elephants are large quadrupedal [[mammals]] native to [[Africa]] and [[India]]. The elephant is noted for its long trunk, or proboscis, a flexible nose strong enough to lift objects.

Elephants are not mentioned directly in the [[Bible]]. According to the young earth creationist view they were created on the sixth day with the other beasts of the earth (Genesis 1:24-25) and survived the [[Great Flood]] on [[Noah's Ark]] (Genesis 7:7-8). The Apocryphal book [[1 Maccabees]] mentions thirty-two elephants sent by the Persian king Antiochus to attack [[Judas Machabeus]]. Numerous references are made to [[ivory]], a substance created from their tusks and worth great amounts.

In more recent times, domestic elephants have been used for riding, Polo, carrying heavy loads, and [[war]] elephants.

Centuries of hunting elephants for their ivory has dwindled the population of these animals. Renewed efforts at stewardship have caused a population boom, with the number of elephants in Africa alone tripling in the last six months.

An elephant is the symbol of the [[Republican Party]].

== Support for Creationism ==
One of the supposed pieces of evidence against evolution is that scientists cannot decide what elephants could have evolved from. Many scientists point to the idea that elephants share a common ancestor with sea cows and water dwelling hyraxes. Some support for this point of view is that elephants might have used their trunks as snorkels.

In the past, there were many different types of elephants like [[mammoth|mammoths]] and [[mastodon|mastodons]], but most young earth creation scientists say that these species never made it onto the Ark and that these species{{fact}}. Scientists and scholars agree that Noah could not have trekked all the way to the arctic to collect a pair of mastodons before the earth was flooded, and they all drowned.{{fact}} [[Polar bears]] and [[penguins]] survived because both are excellent swimmers and could have swam to floating glaciers and ridden them through the [[Great Flood]].

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Mammals]]

Elephant

2007-03-23T20:42:23Z

Touchedbyabear: typo fix

User talk:DunsScotus

2007-03-23T20:36:36Z

Touchedbyabear:

I hope you can provide a good citation for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Post-Diluvian_Diasporas&diff=57626&oldid=57611 this] claim. Otherwise, it will get removed pretty quickly. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 14:20, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:The transport of animal and plant species by large scale weather phenomena is well established. [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 14:26, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::If so, then it should be easy for you to find a citation. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 14:28, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::already did [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 14:30, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

== Squid and such like. ==

"Interesting" edits Duns, but I rather suspect that you may be over-egging it. I don't get the impression that leg-pulling is taken to lightly here.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 15:01, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:British_cons, as church father [[Martin Luther]] once said, "here I stand, I can do no other!" I am not going to be browbeat or intimidated into recanting my conservative principles. Again, as national father and influential conservative [[Barry Goldwater]] once said, "extremism in the defense of virtue is no vice." I support God and Country, and that's all I need to know.
::Yes, I see. It's rather a shame there is no discussion topic along the lines of "Who was the more liberal: Genghis Khan or Atilla the Hun" as I imagine you could profitably contribute. I'm surprised that I've not seen you on the Flat Earth Society article.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 15:42, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
:::Easy answer, Cons. Atilla was significantly more liberal (or anti-conservative, as the case may be) because he ran his organization on a communist model (significant redistribution of income, etc.) and also actively worked to destroy the Roman empire through pillaging and sexual immorality. Khan was a proud general and father of millions (literally) who ushered in a new age of prosperity for his citizens/subjects.[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/02/0214_030214_genghis.html] [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 15:51, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
::::I would have expected no less than you would be to the right of Atilla the Hun. errrr literally.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 15:58, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
::Cons, how can you embrace figures like [[Margaret Thatcher]] when you express such a dislike for muscular conservatism? [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:03, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
:::While many people did indeed make unfortunate comparisons between Margret thatcher and other, more militant, historical I never saw them. There is a clear difference between British Conservatism and, for example, militarism.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 16:15, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
::I'm glad, Cons, because Ms. Thatcher hardly treated the Falklands as Ghenghis did the Uzbekistani steppes. [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:19, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
:::Errr. No, she didn't. Do you feel that was an error?--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 16:24, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
:::A certain degree of rigor should be expected in dealings with other nation states, but Ms. Thatcher was simply acting to restore British territory to the crown, and as such, did not need to overreact. [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:25, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
::::Right. Got the smiting about right then?--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 16:26, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

== I am watching you ==

You can decide whether that is good or bad. Your submissions are interesting enough that I don't want to miss anything, espicially the subtext, but maybe I'm crazy. Whom gods would destroy (oops, God)...[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 15:55, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

I am also watching him. Too many people on this site don't seem to take it seriously, although Duns is not afraid to speak the truth and present the facts which we can all see in the Bible. [[User:touchedbyabear|touchedbyabear]] 15:58, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Yes, he is always consistent. Im just not sure whether it is Emersonian consistency, or something perhaps a little more complex. [[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 16:01, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:The Lord already watches everything I do, Palmd001, I have nothing to answer for that I will not be held accountable for on the Day of Judgment. Look to your own house, Palmd001, if you think your secularist medical degree will have any pull with The Lord, our God. TouchedbyaBear, thank you for your support. It is important that true believers stick together, and together, we will laugh at the sinners in their lake of fire. [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:03, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
::Laughing at sinners in their lake of fire seems like a pretty horrible view for a Christian to take. I thought Jesus taught to love everyone, and if you loved everyone, you should feel sorry for those burning in hell not jubilation. Then again, what do I know? [[User:ColinR|ColinR]][[User_talk:ColinR|talk]] 16:11, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

::Colin, no less a church father as [[Tertulian]] explains that the the saved will delight in the torment of the damned. Besides, if you were a good Christian, you'd know that the damned no longer have any chance of salvation, having thrown away the precious gift of God's sacrifice for them.

"However there are other spectacles--that last eternal day of judgment, ignored by nations, derided by them, when the accumulation of the years and all the many things which they produced will be burned in a single fire. What a broad spectacle then appears! How I will be lost in admiration! How I will laugh! How I will rejoice! I will be full of exaltation then as I see so many great kings who by public report were accepted into heaven groaning in the deepest darkness with Jove himself and alongside those very men who testified on their behalf! They will include governors of provinces who persecuted the name of our Lord burning in flames more fierce that those with which they proudly raged against the Christians! And those wise philosophers who earlier convinced their disciples that God was irrelevant and who claimed either that there is no such thing as a soul or that our souls would not return to their original bodies will be ashamed as they burn in the conflagration with those very disciples. And the poets will be there, shaking with fear, not in front of the tribunal of Rhadamanthus or Minos, but of the Christ they did not anticipate! Then it will be easier to hear the tragic actors, because their voices will be more resonant in their own calamity (better voices since they will be screaming in greater terror). The actors will then be easier to recognize, for the fire will make them much more agile. Then the charioteer will be on show, all red in a wheel of fire, and the athletes will be visible, thrown, not in the gymnasium, but in the fire, unless I have no wish to look at their bodies then, so that I can more readily cast an insatiable gaze on those who raged against our Lord. `This is the man,' I will say, `the son of a workman or a prostitute, the destroyer of the sabbath, the Samaritan possessed by the devil. He is the man whom you brought from Judas, the man who was beaten with a reed and with fists, reviled with spit, who was given gall and vinegar to drink. He is the man whom his disciples took away in secret, so that it could be said that he was resurrected or whom the gardener took away, so that the crowd of visitors would not harm his lettuces.' What praetor or consul or quaestor or priest will from his own generosity grant you the sight of such things or the exultation in them? And yet we already have these things to a certain extent through faith, represented to us by the imagining spirit. Besides, what sorts of things has the eye not seen or the ear not heard and what sorts of things have not arisen in the human heart (1. Cor. 2, 9)? I believe these are more pleasing than the race track and the circus and both enclosures" [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:19, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
::Like I said, what do I know? I guess all the times I was told about Christianity being a religion of peace and love, they really meant reveling in the suffering of others. And as for the damned, I thought that Puritan idea died out long ago, otherwise what good is God's forgiveness? Unless you are referring to the damned as those who blasphemed, the only unforgivable sin in the Bible. Regardless, delighting in suffering of others still seems so contrary to everything Jesus ever said. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]][[User_talk:ColinR|talk]] 16:28, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Excellent...fiat lux, and keep it coming.[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 16:06, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Hmmm...a tangled web indeed...Im enjoying this more than I'd even hoped. Follow that rainbow, hermano.[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 16:10, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:Are you a homosexual, Palmd001, and if then, shouldn't that be hermani? If so, I'd be uncomfortable if you were posting on my talk page. I prefer to associate with clean living Christians, not debauched secularists. [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:19, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Don't worry, my friend, if I were a Sodomite you wouldn't be my type. I'm not checking out your butt.[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 16:20, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:Then why are you watching me, Pald001? [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:23, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

::And while I am not an expert in bigotry, I am an expert in Spanish. "Hermano" is Spanish for "Brother" regardless of the sexual proclivities of the speaker. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 16:22, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Myk, thanks for the useful Spanish lesson. Much appreciated. Unlike our Lord, I'm not one for speaking in tongues.[[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:23, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Myk, perhaps the reason you're such a spanish expert is that you're really a Moor or perhaps a terrorist from [basque_country]. [[User:touchedbyabear|touchedbyabear]]

Please play nice, Duns is one of the most interesting folks here. Or at least, the smartest. [[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 16:28, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

[[User:touchedbyabear|touchedbyabear]], such ad hominem attacks have no place in discussion. Anyone with a little Spanish knowledge would know that hermaño is Spanish for brother regardless. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]][[User_talk:ColinR|talk]] 16:30, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

::You're right [[User:ColinR|ColinR]], I'm sorry. I actually don't know any Spanish, I really only know American and a few phrases here and there. [[User:touchedbyabear|touchedbyabear]]

User talk:DunsScotus

2007-03-23T20:33:45Z

Touchedbyabear:

User talk:DunsScotus

2007-03-23T20:27:37Z

Touchedbyabear:

I hope you can provide a good citation for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Post-Diluvian_Diasporas&diff=57626&oldid=57611 this] claim. Otherwise, it will get removed pretty quickly. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 14:20, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:The transport of animal and plant species by large scale weather phenomena is well established. [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 14:26, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::If so, then it should be easy for you to find a citation. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 14:28, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::already did [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 14:30, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

== Squid and such like. ==

"Interesting" edits Duns, but I rather suspect that you may be over-egging it. I don't get the impression that leg-pulling is taken to lightly here.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 15:01, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:British_cons, as church father [[Martin Luther]] once said, "here I stand, I can do no other!" I am not going to be browbeat or intimidated into recanting my conservative principles. Again, as national father and influential conservative [[Barry Goldwater]] once said, "extremism in the defense of virtue is no vice." I support God and Country, and that's all I need to know.
::Yes, I see. It's rather a shame there is no discussion topic along the lines of "Who was the more liberal: Genghis Khan or Atilla the Hun" as I imagine you could profitably contribute. I'm surprised that I've not seen you on the Flat Earth Society article.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 15:42, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
:::Easy answer, Cons. Atilla was significantly more liberal (or anti-conservative, as the case may be) because he ran his organization on a communist model (significant redistribution of income, etc.) and also actively worked to destroy the Roman empire through pillaging and sexual immorality. Khan was a proud general and father of millions (literally) who ushered in a new age of prosperity for his citizens/subjects.[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/02/0214_030214_genghis.html] [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 15:51, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
::::I would have expected no less than you would be to the right of Atilla the Hun. errrr literally.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 15:58, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
::Cons, how can you embrace figures like [[Margaret Thatcher]] when you express such a dislike for muscular conservatism? [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:03, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
:::While many people did indeed make unfortunate comparisons between Margret thatcher and other, more militant, historical I never saw them. There is a clear difference between British Conservatism and, for example, militarism.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 16:15, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
::I'm glad, Cons, because Ms. Thatcher hardly treated the Falklands as Ghenghis did the Uzbekistani steppes. [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:19, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
:::Errr. No, she didn't. Do you feel that was an error?--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 16:24, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
:::A certain degree of rigor should be expected in dealings with other nation states, but Ms. Thatcher was simply acting to restore British territory to the crown, and as such, did not need to overreact. [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:25, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
::::Right. Got the smiting about right then?--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 16:26, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

== I am watching you ==

You can decide whether that is good or bad. Your submissions are interesting enough that I don't want to miss anything, espicially the subtext, but maybe I'm crazy. Whom gods would destroy (oops, God)...[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 15:55, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

I am also watching him. Too many people on this site don't seem to take it seriously, although Duns is not afraid to speak the truth and present the facts which we can all see in the Bible. [[User:touchedbyabear|touchedbyabear]] 15:58, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Yes, he is always consistent. Im just not sure whether it is Emersonian consistency, or something perhaps a little more complex. [[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 16:01, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:The Lord already watches everything I do, Palmd001, I have nothing to answer for that I will not be held accountable for on the Day of Judgment. Look to your own house, Palmd001, if you think your secularist medical degree will have any pull with The Lord, our God. TouchedbyaBear, thank you for your support. It is important that true believers stick together, and together, we will laugh at the sinners in their lake of fire. [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:03, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
::Laughing at sinners in their lake of fire seems like a pretty horrible view for a Christian to take. I thought Jesus taught to love everyone, and if you loved everyone, you should feel sorry for those burning in hell not jubilation. Then again, what do I know? [[User:ColinR|ColinR]][[User_talk:ColinR|talk]] 16:11, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

::Colin, no less a church father as [[Tertulian]] explains that the the saved will delight in the torment of the damned. Besides, if you were a good Christian, you'd know that the damned no longer have any chance of salvation, having thrown away the precious gift of God's sacrifice for them.

"However there are other spectacles--that last eternal day of judgment, ignored by nations, derided by them, when the accumulation of the years and all the many things which they produced will be burned in a single fire. What a broad spectacle then appears! How I will be lost in admiration! How I will laugh! How I will rejoice! I will be full of exaltation then as I see so many great kings who by public report were accepted into heaven groaning in the deepest darkness with Jove himself and alongside those very men who testified on their behalf! They will include governors of provinces who persecuted the name of our Lord burning in flames more fierce that those with which they proudly raged against the Christians! And those wise philosophers who earlier convinced their disciples that God was irrelevant and who claimed either that there is no such thing as a soul or that our souls would not return to their original bodies will be ashamed as they burn in the conflagration with those very disciples. And the poets will be there, shaking with fear, not in front of the tribunal of Rhadamanthus or Minos, but of the Christ they did not anticipate! Then it will be easier to hear the tragic actors, because their voices will be more resonant in their own calamity (better voices since they will be screaming in greater terror). The actors will then be easier to recognize, for the fire will make them much more agile. Then the charioteer will be on show, all red in a wheel of fire, and the athletes will be visible, thrown, not in the gymnasium, but in the fire, unless I have no wish to look at their bodies then, so that I can more readily cast an insatiable gaze on those who raged against our Lord. `This is the man,' I will say, `the son of a workman or a prostitute, the destroyer of the sabbath, the Samaritan possessed by the devil. He is the man whom you brought from Judas, the man who was beaten with a reed and with fists, reviled with spit, who was given gall and vinegar to drink. He is the man whom his disciples took away in secret, so that it could be said that he was resurrected or whom the gardener took away, so that the crowd of visitors would not harm his lettuces.' What praetor or consul or quaestor or priest will from his own generosity grant you the sight of such things or the exultation in them? And yet we already have these things to a certain extent through faith, represented to us by the imagining spirit. Besides, what sorts of things has the eye not seen or the ear not heard and what sorts of things have not arisen in the human heart (1. Cor. 2, 9)? I believe these are more pleasing than the race track and the circus and both enclosures" [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:19, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Excellent...fiat lux, and keep it coming.[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 16:06, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Hmmm...a tangled web indeed...Im enjoying this more than I'd even hoped. Follow that rainbow, hermano.[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 16:10, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:Are you a homosexual, Palmd001, and if then, shouldn't that be hermani? If so, I'd be uncomfortable if you were posting on my talk page. I prefer to associate with clean living Christians, not debauched secularists. [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:19, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Don't worry, my friend, if I were a Sodomite you wouldn't be my type. I'm not checking out your butt.[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 16:20, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:Then why are you watching me, Pald001? [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:23, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

::And while I am not an expert in bigotry, I am an expert in Spanish. "Hermano" is Spanish for "Brother" regardless of the sexual proclivities of the speaker. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 16:22, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Myk, thanks for the useful Spanish lesson. Much appreciated. Unlike our Lord, I'm not one for speaking in tongues.[[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 16:23, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Myk, perhaps the reason you're such a spanish expert is that you're really a Moor or perhaps a terrorist from [basque_country]. [[User:touchedbyabear|touchedbyabear]]

Elephant

2007-03-23T20:09:32Z

Touchedbyabear:

{{stub}}
<div style="width: 70%; margin: 0 15% 1em 15%; text-align: center; background-color: #DEE6ED; padding: 0.5em; border: solid 1px #6699CC;">
This article has been identified as not maintaining a neutral point of view. You can and are encouraged to make this article better by contributing. This article may contain opinions, a one-sided bias, or information without proper citation that could be considered opinion. Please be encouraged to edit this article by removing opinions, presenting multiple points of view, and/or adding citations. Please remember to abide by [[The Conservapedia Commandments]].
</div>
<includeonly>[[Category:Articles needing major improvement]]</includeonly>

The elephant (Elephantidae) belongs to the family of pachyderm, and the only remaining family in the order Proboscidea in the class Mammalia. Elephantidae has three living species: the African Bush Elephant, the African Forest Elephant (until recently known collectively as the African Elephant), and the Asian Elephant (also known as the Indian Elephant).

Elephants are mammals, and the largest land animals alive today. The elephant's gestation period is 22 months, the longest of any land animal, although the blue whale is larger. Some people incorrectly believe that the blue whale once walked on land. At birth it is common for an elephant calf to weigh 120 kg (265 lb). An elephant may live as long as 72 years, sometimes longer. The largest elephant ever recorded was shot in Angola in 1956. It was male and weighed about 12,000 kg (26,400 lb), with a shoulder height of 4.2m, a meter taller than the average male African elephant.

Talk:Bear

2007-03-23T20:03:49Z

Touchedbyabear:

@DunsScotus: I believe it would make more sense to append that definition of 'Bear' to the article on Homosexuality, or to create it as a separate article, instead of appending it to this one about the quadrupedal mammal. [[User:SquidFriend|SquidFriend]] 14:50, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:That might be a good compromise, SquidFriend. [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 14:51, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

::I concur if DunScotus puts this on Homosexuality I won't complain. but ONLY that article. Okay? [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 14:52, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Putting it on the forsaken page of homosexuality seems to be a wise idea. Most good Christians would not want to go there and thus will never be exposed to this sort of debauchery. [[User:touchedbyabear|touchedbyabear]] 16:02, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

User talk:DunsScotus

2007-03-23T20:00:26Z

Touchedbyabear:

User talk:DunsScotus

2007-03-23T19:59:54Z

Touchedbyabear: /* I am watching you */