Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

This forum is for the discussion of the evidence for evolution. Anyone is welcome to post, however, scripture is not allowed. As the title says, Science Only please!

Moderator: Moderators

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Frank » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:28 am

Christine Janis wrote:Coronary vessels are acquired independently in teleost fish, mammals, and archosaurs.
Frank wrote:I have refuted this superficial evolutionary story-telling earlier. So the magic evolutionary wand is waved three independent times and three times coronary vessels appear. No one has ever observed anything like this occurring, it only occurs in the minds of evolutionists, not in the real world.

If we look at the distribution of coronary vessels in vertebrates, we can see that it is a disjunct one. They are present in birds, crocodiles (including alligators), mammals, some (but not all) teleost fish...<snip>

You have failed to make the slightest attempt to explain how coronary blood vessels supposedly evolved. You mention ‘distribution’, but you fail to explain how coronary blood vessels originated. Your arguments are nothing more than a futile attempt to hide the fact that you simply have no evolutionary explanations. As always, you completely fail to take into account the overall complexity of the CV system and you seem completely oblivious to the adverse effects (pathophysiology) of structural and functional changes to the CV system.

Christine Janis wrote:What Frank needs to explain is, if the heart is “intelligently designed”, why this system of coronary circulation is so imperfect that humans are so prone to heart attacks from blocked coronary arteries.

You have committed yet another logical fallacy. This time it is the either-or fallacy. Your problem is that attempting to discredit A does not prove B. The really pitiful thing about your argument is that, as I have been saying all along, a non functioning CV system will result in death and extinction, not evolution. Your argument here is powerful evidence against evolution because coronary blood vessels that cannot meet the metabolic needs of the myocardium will result in heart failure.
Christine Janis wrote:The evolutionary explanation is easy ---- the human heart is a jury-rigged system: a fish heart to which things have been added <snip>

Your one word evolutionary explanation for the origin of coronary blood vessels (‘added’) is completely devoid of any scientific or any intellectual content. To say that coronary vessels were merely ‘added’ is about as scientific as saying a frog transformed itself into a prince.
Frank
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:07 pm

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Mountkeen » Thu Jul 21, 2016 10:34 am

My word......you wait nearly 2 months for any form of response from Frank and suddenly 7 come along at once!

If I were a cynic I might suspect that Frank has been conferring with some buddies in yet another attempt at misrepresenting the science.
Mountkeen
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 5:11 pm
Location: West of England

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby ProfessorTertius » Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:24 pm

And Frank expects a busy paleontology professor to drop everything and give him spoon-fed remedial tutoring on the evolution of the circulatory system. Sheesh. Frank can learn it the same way everybody else does: read a textbook.

I suppose it helps one's sense of self-importance if one can pretend that top science professors are at one's beck and call.
ProfessorTertius
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 5:26 pm

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Frank » Thu Sep 01, 2016 10:42 am

ProfessorTertius wrote:And Frank expects a busy paleontology professor to drop everything and give him spoon-fed remedial tutoring on the evolution of the circulatory system. Sheesh. Frank can learn it the same way everybody else does: read a textbook.

I suppose it helps one's sense of self-importance if one can pretend that top science professors are at one's beck and call.

What truly pitiful nonsense you write. Of course the challenge for you is to provide explanations from the textbooks that you claim have explanations to what I have written. Evolutionist Franklin Harold agrees with what I am saying: "...but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations." (Franklin M. Harold, The way of the cell: molecules, organisms and the order of life, Oxford University Press, New York, p. 205, 2001).

So the challenge I present to you in this supposedly scientific forum is to provide evolutionary explanations for the following:

Fish heart:

The two chambered fish heart has an atrium and ventricle, two valves and cardiac conduction. A properly shaped atrium and ventricle, properly functioning valves and correct cardiac conduction are required for pumping a one way flow of blood to the tissues.

Cardiac conduction:

If the excitation wave from the sino-atrial node travelled through the atria and straight into the ventricles, then there would not be enough time for the ventricles to fill with blood properly before contracting. The atrial impulses converge on the atrio-ventricular node and from there are directed along specialised conducting tissue, the bundle of His, which travel into the ventricular septum and then spread out into the ventricular myocardium. These specialised conducting fibres are ordered specifically to ensure that the contraction of the ventricular muscle fibres occurs in a precise manner, starting from the tips of the ventricles. Without this conducting system, the atria and ventricles would contract out of sequence and cause severe problems with blood circulation.

Diaphragm:

The diaphragm is innervated by the phrenic nerve, which contains axons from cervical spinal nerves (C3 – C5) and the external and internal intercostals are innervated from the thoracic spinal nerves T2-T12. The rhythm of respiration is controlled by the respiratory centre in the brain stem, with respiration being modified by cortical influences, chemical stimuli, proprioceptor input, and the inflation reflex. Chemoreceptor regulation of respiration also occurs. The bronchial tree is innervated by the pulmonary plexus, which is a complex network of sympathetic and parasympathetic neurons.

I predict that you won’t even make the slightest attempt to provide any evolutionary explanations for the fish heart, cardiac conduction or the diaphragm. Typical of evolutionists, you will run for cover. Of course the reason I predict this is because an understanding of anatomy and physiology shows that a step wise evolutionary development of the above is impossible.

The cardiovascular system serves the purpose of meeting the metabolic needs of the stationary body cells. However according to evolutionary theory, the cardiovascular system could not have evolved for any reason or purpose. What totally irrational nonsense evolution is. If evolution was science, then the cardiovascular system would surely falsify evolution. No, evolution is a religion that is adhered to by religious fanatics.
Frank
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:07 pm

Re:

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Sep 01, 2016 3:18 pm

Christine Janis has been attempting to post on the forum (several weeks ago) but was unable to do so due to password problems. All her emails to committee members (and one from me) about this issue were all apparently ignored and the problem was not overcome.

MANY educated Christians accept evolution. I guess they must be 'religious fanatics' too?
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 7899
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Roger Stanyard » Thu Sep 01, 2016 3:37 pm

Alas, I do not know how to fix Christine's problem. I am not an IT man.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6160
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Roger Stanyard » Thu Sep 01, 2016 3:46 pm

[quote="FrankTypical of evolutionists, you will run for cover. .[/quote]

Nobody has "run for cover" here and you comment is nasty and arrogant - not least because you disappear for years on end in this forum only to return on a hit and run basis. Seems that like so many fundamentalists, you have the same understanding of the ninth commandment as you do of convincing science.

Don't worry, though, we have years of experience of idiotic US religious fundamentalists masquerading as scientists, as well as their failure to deliver any arguments that have convinced the rest of the scientific world or the law courts.

What is the real reason your are hear wasting your time with "evolutionists" who "run for cover"? Your own warped self importance as a complete non-entity in the scientific world or to preach and save souls?
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6160
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Christine Janis » Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:11 pm

Ah deary me, one does have to hope that Frank hasn't given himself carpal tunnel syndrome from all that cutting and pasting from online medical books.

I do have to note that his quotation from Franklin Harold "The Way of the Cell" is a totally bogus one found on creationist sites. It's an old creationist classic, and proves that Frank never read this book, just copied it off a site.

In this book the author clearly states (p 16):

"Like the great majority of my colleagues, I start from the premise that both the origin of life and its subsequent expansion should be, and eventually will be, wholly accounted for by natural processes operating within the framework of chemistry and physics."

Based on tracking down this quote, I ended up buying his new book --- it's a really nice treatment of cellular and molecular biology from an evolutionary perspective.

Now, I do have answers to some of these questions, and will post them this weekend (not that Frank will accept any answers from science, because he already knows the answer and is just here to mock)*. But here's a question for Frank.

What's all this talk about the "human heart"? How unique do you imagine the human heart to be amongst the Mammalia. Would it bother you to know that it's just about identical to the heart of other apes?

*I'm busy revising my vertebrate biology textbook ---- I'll be sure to include Frank's observations that hagfish aren't classified as vertebrates and that crocodiles have a diaphragm.
Christine Janis
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:25 am

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Christine Janis » Thu Sep 01, 2016 8:05 pm

One final comment for Frank.

Rejecting/disavowing an explanation is not the same as "refuting" it.

I'll be back at the weekend. Unfortunately, most of the evolutionary explanations these days come from evo-devo, which Frank has conveniently rejected as "Haeckelian pseudoscience". That's the problem with trying to explain things to the science challenged.

Let's put things another way. All of the complex features of the human circulatory system that Frank has pasted in from an online medical textbook. How exactly do those develop in a human from a single-celled zygote?

What? You can't explain exactly how a single cell progressed to the complexity of an adult human? Clearly it never happened, then.
Christine Janis
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:25 am

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Christine Janis » Sun Sep 04, 2016 4:27 pm

Ah well, not sure if anybody is paying any attention, but as I said I'd post some science at the weekend, here I am.

Frank asked me about the evolution of the mammalian diaphragm (well, in the context of, if I answered one question, it was then another one that I supposedly should have answered), but I was waiting to review some new papers on this issue (listed below). So, here is a draft of my textbook entry on this topic, which rather nicely ties together genomics, evo devo, and the fossil record.

Now, we know that Frank won't accept this as science. Because, for Frank, an "evolutionary explanation" would be like we can do for modern science: explain exactly how a single celled zygote develops into the complexity of the adult. Oh wait, we can't do that either. Never mind. (Mark you, if a single cell can *develop* into a complex multicelllar organism, then surely one can, over time, *evolve* into one?)

Mammals differ from other tetrapods in having a vertebral column that is both more regionalized and more constrained in numbers of vertebrae. The trunk vertebrae are differentiated into two regions; thoracic (with ribs) and lumbar (without ribs, although small ones may be retained in early mammals), which together rarely number more than 20. With a very few exceptions (sloths and manatees) the number of cervical (neck) vertebrae is fixed at seven (mammals with longer necks simply have longer cervical vertebrae). The primitive amniote condition is six cervical vertebrae, but sauropsids may have many, and also many vertebrae in the trunk region. Mammals have transverse processes on their lumbar vertebrae for muscle attachment: these are not homologous to ribs but are projections of the vertebrae, and the evidence suggests that they have evolved independently in different mammalian lineages.

This change and stabilization of vertebral form is first seen in cynodonts (at least by the level of Thrinaxodon), and may all be linked to a common developmental cause, related to the evolution of the mammalian diaphragm. The diaphragm is important in lung ventilation, especially at high levels of activity. The diaphragm forms at the level of the thoraco-lumbar boundary, and the loss of lumbar ribs in cynodonts has long been thought to herald its evolutionary appearance. Many vertebrates have a transverse septum within their peritoneal cavity* that separates the lungs from the viscera, and stabilizes the viscera. The mammalian diaphragm is basically a muscularization of this septum, as can be seen in mammalian development. The muscles of the diaphragm share a common developmental origin with the muscles of the forelimb.

This may all be related with a shift in Hox gene expression in mammals related to a change in developmental patterning of the vertebral column and muscles forming in the anterior portion of the body. Based on studies of the brachial plexus (nerves that exit from between the cervical vertebrae and combine to innervate the forelimb muscles), there appears to have been backwards shift in both the exit of the plexus nerves and the position of the developing forelimb in mammals in comparison with other amniotes. This may have contributed to the muscles of the forelimb (specifically the ones on the medial side of the scapula) invading the diaphragm in mammals.

Thus, many key features of mammalian locomotion and respiration are linked by a common developmental change that probably happened at or near the base of the cynodont lineage, possibly in correlation with a higher metabolic rate allowing for greater levels of activity


*something that Frank claimed didn't exist.

References

Hirasawa T, Kuratani S. 2013. A new scenario of the evolutionary derivation of the mammalian diaphragm from shoulder muscles. Journal of Anatomy 222:504-517.

Buchholtz, EA and 4 others. 2012. Fixed cervical count and the origin of the mammalian diaphragm. Evolution and Development 14:3990411.
Christine Janis
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:25 am

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Christine Janis » Tue Sep 06, 2016 7:42 am

Here's another cool paper for Frank, who claims that it is impossible that the sinoatrial node of mammals is homogous with the sinus venosus of other vertebrates. From a medical journal, I should note.

J. Cardiovasc. Dev. Dis. 2014, 1(1), 14-28; doi:10.3390/jcdd1010014
Evolution of the Sinus Venosus from Fish to Human

The sinus venosus, the cardiac chamber upstream of the (right) atrium, is a severely underinvestigated structure. Yet, its myocardium harbors the cardiac pacemaker in all vertebrates. In human, ectopic pacemaking and subsequent pathologies may originate from sinus venosus-derived myocardium surrounding the coronary sinus and the superior caval vein. In ectothermic vertebrates, i.e., fishes, amphibians and reptiles, the sinus venosus aids atrial filling by contracting prior to the atrium (atria). This is facilitated by the sinuatrial delay of approximately the same duration as the atrioventricular delay, which facilitates atrial filling of the ventricles. In mammals, the sinuatrial delay is lost, and the sinus venosus-derived myocardium persists as an extensive myocardial sheet surrounding the caval veins, which is activated in synchrony with the myocardium of the atria. The caval vein myocardium is hardly of significance in the healthy formed heart, but we suggest that the sinus venosus functions as a chamber during development when cardiac output, heart rate, blood pressure and architecture is much more like that of ectothermic vertebrates. The remodeling of the sinus venosus in mammals may be an adaptation associated with the high heart rates necessary for postnatal endothermy. If so, the endothermic birds should exhibit a similar remodeling as mammals, which remains to be investigated.
Christine Janis
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:25 am

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Christine Janis » Thu Sep 08, 2016 4:57 pm

Another paper for Frank, who wonders how the vertebrate vascular system could ever have been developed. (It's even open access).

(I think I'll continue with a post like this every few days until Frank decides to return, and to claim that scientists know nothing about science.)

Monica R. Hensley et al., 2016. Evolutionary and developmental analysis reveals KANK genes were co-opted for vertebrate vascular development. Scientific Reports | 6:27816 | DOI: 10.1038/srep27816

Abstract: Gene co-option, usually after gene duplication, in the evolution of development is found to contribute to vertebrate morphological innovations, including the endothelium-based vascular system. Recently, a zebrafish kank gene was found expressed in the vascular vessel primordium, suggesting KANK genes are a component of the developmental tool kit for the vertebrate vascular system. However, how the KANK gene family is involved in vascular vessel development during evolution remains largely unknown.
First, we analyzed the molecular evolution of the KANK genes in metazoan, and found that KANK1, KANK2, KANK3 and KANK4 emerged in the lineage of vertebrate, consistent with the two rounds of vertebrate whole-genome duplications (WGD). Moreover, KANK genes were further duplicated in teleosts through the bony-fish specific WGD, while only kank1 and kank4 duplicates were retained in some of the examined fish species. We also found all zebrafish kank genes, except kank1b, are primarily expressed during embryonic vascular development. Compared to invertebrate KANK gene expression in the central nervous system, the vascular expression of zebrafish kank genes suggested KANK genes were co-opted for vertebrate vascular development. Given the cellular roles of KANK genes, our results suggest that this co-option may facilitate the evolutionary origin of vertebrate vascular vessels.

First paragraph of discussion: Understanding the morphological complexity of living organisms such as vertebrates is one of the central ques- tions for evolutionary biology. The separation of the vertebrate lineage was accompanied with key morphological characteristics, one of which was the endothelium-based vascular system. Such morphological innovations are usually generated through tinkering or modification of the corresponding developmental genetic tool kits. Thus, the evolution and gene expression of key genes in such genetic tool kits provide us important information for understanding the evolutionary origin of morphological novelties. Here, we first analyzed the evolution of the KANK gene family and then examined the zebrafish kank gene expression patterns during early development. Our results suggested KANK genes were co-opted for vertebrate vascular development after vertebrate WGD (whole genome duplication), and KANK gene duplication and diversification may facilitate the evolutionary origin of vertebrate vascular vessels.
Christine Janis
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:25 am

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Christine Janis » Mon Oct 03, 2016 5:16 pm

I was getting pretty bored with this, but found another good paper for Frank to consider, should he ever venture back here.

Poelmann RE, Gittenberger-de Groot AC, Vicente-Steijn R, Wisse LJ, Bartelings MM, et al. (2014) Evolution and Development of Ventricular Septation in the Amniote Heart. PLoS ONE 9(9): e106569. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0106569.
1 Department of Anatomy and Embryology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands, 2 Department of Cardiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands, 3 Department of Molecular Cell Biology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands,

First paragraph of discussion:

The evolution from the single fish ventricle to the two ventricles of mammals and archosaurs is the result of ventricular septation and has been studied and discussed for more than a century. It is tempting to apply to intermediate stages the partially septated ventricles encountered in turtles, lizards and snakes. Indeed, all amniotes exhibit a horizontal or folding septum and here we provided a mechanism for its formation involving the epicardium in fusion of two opposing myocardial walls. In the completely septated ventricle, the folding septum forms the anterior part of the septum. The epicardium originating from the PEO [24–26], important for multiple aspects of heart development, is already present in lampreys [27]. Reducing the size of the PEO is exemplified by the podoplanin mouse mutant [7] and inhibits its outgrowth in chicken [6]. Both lead to diminished or retarded covering of the myocardium and lack of epithelial-mesenchymal transition producing a decreased number of EPDCs (this paper). Many genes are expressed in the epicardium lining the myocar- dium of the heart. They can be divided in ‘epithelial genes’ including integrins and b-catenin, but also others like RALDH2, and several transcription factors [28] including Tbx18, Tbx5, Tcf21, NFATc1, and WT1. A subset of these genes is important for epithelial to mesenchymal transition resulting in the formation of EPDCs. The latter can differentiate into smooth muscle cells of the coronary vessels and into perivascular and interstitial fibroblasts. It is evident that mechanical or genetical interference with the epicardium or EPDCs not only disturbs coronary vascularisation but can strongly influence cardiomyocyte differen- tiation and ventricular septation [6,7]
Christine Janis
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:25 am

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Brian Jordan » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:38 pm

Thanks for persisting, Christine. Sorry I haven't been around to read and comment for a while.
I think Frank might keep quiet now that specific genes involved in evolutionary changes are being discussed: after all, the very mechanisms of evolution require that evolution exists, which rather conflicts with Frank's belief that humans were uniquely produced from clay.
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4169
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible

Postby Frank » Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:34 pm

Christine Janis wrote:I do have to note that his quotation from Franklin Harold "The Way of the Cell" is a totally bogus one found on creationist sites. It's an old creationist classic, and proves that Frank never read this book, just copied it off a site. In this book the author clearly states (p 16): <snip>

No doubt your claim that my quote is “totally bogus” is deliberately vague. I have a copy of the book and here is an extended version of the quote from page 205:

‘We have no better alternative to offer the enquirer, and in the absence of time travel we may never discover what actually happened and so a modicum of doubt necessarily persists. We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity (16); but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations. There is room for discovery here, and for reflection too; nowhere is the appeal of Gould’s “pluralistic Darwinism” more keenly felt than in the study of cell evolution.’ (Franklin M. Harold, The way of the cell: molecules, organisms and the order of life, Oxford University Press, New York, p. 205, 2001).

There is absolutely nothing wrong with my quote from Franklin Harold’s book.

Christine Janis wrote:Now, I do have answers to some of these questions, and will post them this weekend (not that Frank will accept any answers from science, because he already knows the answer and is just here to mock)*.

Your cutting and pasting of a brief article about the sinoatrial node fails to explain the evolutionary origin of anything. Once again, all the article does is mention anatomical similarities; it fails completely in explaining any evolutionary explanation. As I explained before, it is the logical fallacy of Affirming the Consequent.

Likewise your attempt to explain the evolutionary origin of the vascular system, again by cutting and pasting, fails totally:

Christine Janis wrote:“...and KANK gene duplication and diversification may facilitate the evolutionary origin of vertebrate vascular vessels.”

No science here, just pleading, as it apparent by the word “may”. Once again, your explanation fails totally because it does not take into account the overall complexity of the CV system. Blood vessels won’t function without a pumping heart or blood, so your evolutionary explanation of blood vessels is useless nonsense.

And your attempt to explain the evolutionary origin of Ventricular Septation, once again by cutting and pasting, does not even make the slightest attempt to explain the origin of the dual circulation CV system from the single circulation CV system. This is the crucial issue which is totally ignored (as usual), so the explanation is meaningless.

Earlier you wrote:

Christine Janis wrote:...as all you know about (or, at least, can copy and paste about) is the human condition.

You certainly are in no position to accuse anyone of cutting and pasting, as that is all you have done in your last four posts. I checked my previous posts and noticed that the only thing you have attempted to answer is the evolutionary origin of the diaphragm (cut and pasted), which I will refute in my next post. No doubt the reason that you have cut and pasted articles (which explain the evolutionary origin of nothing), is because you are desperate and want to hide the fact that you simply cannot answer me on anything I wrote previously. For example, I wrote:

“...the amphioxus “heart” has no valves, no separate chambers, no endocardium, no epicardium and it pumps fluid by the pulsing of arteries. Hence your claim of homology here is extremely superficial and your conclusion that this is evidence for evolution is the logical fallacy of Affirming the Consequent. If the excitation wave from the sino-atrial node travelled through the atria and straight into the ventricles, then there would not be enough time for the ventricles to fill with blood properly before contracting. The atrial impulses converge on the atrio-ventricular node and from there are directed along specialised conducting tissue, the bundle of His, which travel into the ventricular septum and then spread out into the ventricular myocardium. These specialised conducting fibres are ordered specifically to ensure that the contraction of the ventricular muscle fibres occurs in a precise manner, starting from the tips of the ventricles. Without this conducting system, the atria and ventricles would contract out of sequence and cause severe problems with blood circulation. The science of Anatomy and Physiology exposes your evolutionary story-telling as the complete nonsense that it is.”

And you made no attempt to answer. So when the details of the functioning of the CV system are presented, you simply cannot answer. This has happened so many times.

It is important to note that the cardiovascular system could not have evolved for any reason or purpose. However the cardiovascular system performs the crucial, life sustaining purpose of maintaining life by meeting the metabolic needs of stationary body cell. Evolution is totally irrational nonsense. This type of argument can be used for any of the body systems.

My summary of your failed attempt to provide an evolutionary explanation for the origin of the cardiovascular system has reached 24 points and will no doubt continue to increase.
Frank
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:07 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Science Only

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron