For the poster formerly known as Doberman

eagle33199 · Dec 13, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Dec 13 2006, 02:12 PM) [snapback]361790[/snapback]</div>

Is that like addition or subtraction or division? Who invented the imaginary number system? Who invented triganometry? Who invented algebra? Tell me, so I can start building some more pedistals - small ones, but pedistals none the less.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Do your own research.

dbermanmd · Dec 13, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Dec 13 2006, 03:05 PM) [snapback]361785[/snapback]</div>

Cute... take my post about Einstein and copy and paste... never an original thought, huh? :lol:
Did Einstein develop a new source of energy or anything like that? Nope. Not a big pedestal for him, either. You say Newton would be somewhere around his knees or ankles... which only supports what was said earlier about Einstein only achieving what he did by standing on the shoulders of giants. Pretty easy to downplay someones accomplishments when they were an integral part of the further accomplishments of the next 300 years.

Dell is not in a league of his own - there are plenty of entrepreneurs out there that have done the same thing - What about Steve Jobs, or Bill Gates? IMO, Jobs is smarter than Gates and Dell combined: He knows more than just the business side, which is the ONLY thing Dell and Gates are good at.
[/b]
Click to expand...

You missed my point again Einstein - [joke here - intended as a play on the post - not name calling] :lol:

Lets see, Apple computers occupy what % of the marketplace and he is worth how much. If it were not for the ipod Apple would be still floundering although itunes seems to be sinking.

Gates - lets see. his company touches almost every human being in the world - and he has given more to charity than some countries GDP.

Still trying to figure out whose shoulders Einstein is standing on. Can't be Newton - how many hundres of years separates them? I am sure some person came up with something before then, no :lol:

Speaking of integral - who invented integers??

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Dec 13 2006, 03:13 PM) [snapback]361795[/snapback]</div>

Do your own research.
[/b]
Click to expand...

You missed my point again.

eagle33199 · Dec 13, 2006

So you base it on how much money they make? Take a look at the histories of the companies: Apple had a good market share, and then Jobs was ousted - he went over and purchased Pixar for a mere 5 million, and turned it into whats quite possibly the best animation studio in the world - ended up selling that to Disney and now owns majority share of that huge company. He also founded NeXT, another computer company which was instrumental to the founding of the world wide web. Apple later purchased NeXt and jobs returned - ever since then Apple's market share has been growing - he essentially turned an almost bankrupt company around into one that can seriously compete with Microsoft. and did you know that, unlike Gates who is with Microsoft only to make money, Jobs has an annual salary of only $1, making him the Guinness World Records lowest paid CEO in history? And did you know that Apple's market share (in personal computing) has risen almost every quarter since his return? Oh and for iTunes - it's true that sales are down, and yet it still leads the market in digital music sales. there's nothing wrong when sales of a product are down due to a downtrend in the market itself.

Gates did donate a lot of money, and i do respect him for that. However, Microsoft is only as big as it is through use of antitrust and bullying people out of markets.

Proco · Dec 13, 2006

Newton beats Einstein in polls of scientists and the public

Members of the public and Royal Society scientists, both Fellows and Research Fellows, were asked to vote in two separate polls for who they thought had made the greater contribution out of Einstein and Newton. They were asked firstly to say who made the bigger overall contribution to science, taking into account the state of knowledge during his time, and secondly to say who they thought had made the bigger positive contribution to humankind.

A total of 1363 members of the public voted online and 345 Royal Society scientists responded to an email questionnaire.

The results showed Newton to be the winner on all counts, although opinion was much closer on the overall contribution to humankind. When asked who made the bigger overall contribution to science the public voted 61.8% for Newton and 38.2% for Einstein and the scientists voted 86.2% for Newton and 13.8% for Einstein.

When asked who made the bigger positive contribution to humankind the public voted extremely closely with 50.1% for Newton and 49.9% for Einstein and the scientists voted 60.9% for Newton and 39.1% for Einstein.[/b]
Click to expand...

The case made for each is here

As for calling people Einstein ... I hear more people called Bozo than I do Einstein. Does that mean Bozo the Clown is really the pre-eminent physicist of all time? Just asking.

dbermanmd · Dec 13, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Dec 13 2006, 03:31 PM) [snapback]361809[/snapback]</div>

Newton beats Einstein in polls of scientists and the public
The case made for each is here

As for calling people Einstein ... I hear more people called Bozo than I do Einstein. Does that mean Bozo the Clown is really the pre-eminent physicist of all time? Just asking.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Biased poll :lol: I could say they are a bunch of anti-Semites but that would be bad taste at this point and time and in this forum :lol:

Bozo was brilliant. Rumor has it he posts here too He has to work harder to get his picture out more though. And he should work on making his name a positive connotation at times - Boza is always associated with negative thoughts and meanings.

eagle33199 · Dec 13, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Dec 13 2006, 02:35 PM) [snapback]361810[/snapback]</div>

Biased poll :lol: I could say they are a bunch of anti-Semites but that would be bad taste at this point and time and in this forum :lol:
[/b]
Click to expand...

So please, show us an unbiased poll.

dbermanmd · Dec 13, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Dec 13 2006, 03:31 PM) [snapback]361808[/snapback]</div>

So you base it on how much money they make?
[/b]
Click to expand...

Nope. Next

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Dec 13 2006, 03:38 PM) [snapback]361812[/snapback]</div>

So please, show us an unbiased poll.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Now that you have admitted to posting a biased poll, why did you do that?

Chuck. · Dec 13, 2006

Newton beats Einstein in polls of scientists and the public
The case made for each is here

I think the bias is Newton in the poll had "the home field advantage".
Click to expand...

eagle33199 · Dec 13, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Dec 13 2006, 02:43 PM) [snapback]361814[/snapback]</div>

Nope. Next
[/b]
Click to expand...

I love it... instead of actually responding to a sound, logical argument constructed from researched facts that support and opinion, you just say no and move on. It must be nice to be able to selectively chose which facts you argue against and still be able to declare yourself a winner.

In what way is Gates better than Jobs, aside from having more money and a company that didn't didn't toss him out on his nice person 20 years ago when it had almost total market share?

Now that you have admitted to posting a biased poll, why did you do that?
[/b]
Click to expand...

First, i didn't post the poll. second, i never said it was biased (in fact, i think it's very representative of the scientific community). however, anyone can say a poll is biased - i was merely asking you to provide us with a relevant poll which you feel is unbiased.

*edit*
One more point to drive home my earlier point: retiring Microsoft exec Jim Allchin sent a Memo to Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer in 2004 stating that "Microsoft had lost sight of what customers need and that he himself would buy a Mac, if he didn't work for Microsoft."

Alnilam · Dec 13, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Dec 13 2006, 06:22 AM) [snapback]361426[/snapback]</div>

I have absolutely nothing against Einstein - by all accounts he was a brilliant man... but thats it. he wasn't some sort of singular individual who did something that no one else could do. he just did something that no one else had done yet - it's entirely possible that some other physicist or mathematician could have come up with all those theories a year after he did.

As for the issue of his wife... got any references? a polling of physicists that state they don't think there was any chance she could have done any work on his theories? After all, she was a brilliant mathematician in her own right, and almost all his work came from the time they spent together (they met in 1896, long before the work he did in 1905, and were even married in 1903). There's no proof either way in the issue... What do you have against her?

and for a Brief history of Time... Nice story, but do you have any proof? articles saying what a tough read it is? FWIW, my mother got it when it first came out and was able to read through it all the way through, i read it back in high school... seems that it wasn't just sitting on everyone's coffee table gathering dust. Did you ever think he came out with those other versions because the book had sold so well? That it was a marketing ploy to sell more books and make more money? no, instead you jump to the conclusion that the original was incomprehensible.
[/b]
Click to expand...

This is juvenile. In this world there are probabilities and possibilities. They are not equal. Virtually anything is possible but far less is probable. I don't have to spend my time proving things you imagine and for which nobody in my community thinks worth any consideration. It's your hypothesis: you show some evidence. This is the religious logic: I believe in God...prove me wrong. Belief isn't fact.

Ask your mother to explain time to you. Maybe the twin paradox, to start out with a light subject from the book. Then maybe work into the heavier concepts like the geometry of space, elementary particles, the cosmic background anisotropy and, perhaps, Hawking radiation. I'm sure she'll do fine (if she has a solid background in physics.)

Einstein was just a genius, but that's it......

He simply revolutionized Newton, who as I say, was probably the most brilliant scientist of all time. A little study here will go a long way instead of just stating things and then telling us you are somewhat out of touch with the subject. You have to be able to recognize "hard" before you can tell us what is just average genius.

daniel · Dec 13, 2006

Newton invented the cat flap. Case closed.

Chuck. · Dec 13, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Dec 13 2006, 08:26 PM) [snapback]361977[/snapback]</div>

Newton invented the cat flap. Case closed.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Wildkow · Dec 14, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Dec 10 2006, 05:41 PM) [snapback]360179[/snapback]</div>

I don't know any Iraqis, but I know a fair amount of Iranians. They liked America; so much so that they moved here when the Shah fell. Withdrawing support for him was one of President Carter's biggest mistakes, and I think it led to acceptance of the fundamentalist movement in the middle east.

Opinion polling a while back in Iraq shows a majority want us to remain there for a while, and a majority wants a representative government, but they are in a region where iron fisted minorities tend to rule. The Iraqi Study Group looks like its saying "stability" is the main goal, and they wouldn't mind the dictatorships like Syria and the religious governments like Iran controlling the people with an iron fist. James Baker was always a "friend" to dictators and despots, and I'm surprised to see the left embrace his commission's report that seems to simply repeat those adages. He does hate Isreal, and so does the left today, so maybe that's the attraction. [/b]
Click to expand...

Surprising, I didn't know that food for thought and grist for study. TY

Wildkow

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(airportkid @ Dec 11 2006, 08:26 PM) [snapback]360764[/snapback]</div>

I said: " ... Doubtless mankind would have eventually produced a mind capable of imagining relativity theory from nothing ..."

So, no, not only am I NOT saying no one else could have achieved the same feat of imagination, but that inevitable someone WOULD (and in our case, it was Einstein). The point isn't the who, it's the impact on history. Whether it was Einstein or someone else, it's one example in human history (among many) where the product of a single intellect had a profound effect on everything that came afterward. You had asserted that one person can't change history (and in the instance of Hitler, I tend to agree, he was simply one more deranged but charismatic personality who had the advantage of advanced technology to carry out genocide more efficiently than his predecessors), but in the case of Einstein, he was decidely singular - a man with no predecessors in his accomplishment, and his accomplishment transformed an entire body of science in less than a lifetime.

Thanks for the YMMV explanation - I kept coming up with "Your Mother Must Vacuum" and "Yodeling Mangles Music Vapidly" and "Yet More Meaningless Vapor" and I knew none of those could be right and it was driving me to distraction!

Meanwhile, back to how did Jesus change history - let's be generous and extend the question beyond the individual and enlarge it to the christian sect: how did the christian sect change history? From my perspective, it is simply one more religion indistinguishable from its predecessors, and indistinguishable from latter day religions (Mormonism, for example). In the year zero AD (hard to assess since Jesus' existence as an actual person is historically questionable) a new movement began called "christianity." How was it in any meaningful way any different from already established sects? How was history shifted by it?

Did it convey fresh insights into how people should behave toward each other? No.

Did people behave any differently? No.

Did it upset any established social order? No.

Did it convey new, significant knowledge about nature that led to agricultural, technological or social advancement? No.

Did it change the practice of medicine? No.

Did it change food preparation methods? No.

Did it change our perception of the universe; alter our outlook on what it all means? No.

Did it change the nature, depth, or intensity of personal religious experience? No.

Did it change whose portrait some people chose to pray to in church? Yes. I will grant that. It's ALL I can think of.

What have I missed?

Mark Baird
Alameda CA
[/b]
Click to expand...

Christians started the first organized schools of high learning and certainly a advanced education at least contributed to most if not all of the items on your list.

Wildkow

Wildkow · Dec 14, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Dec 13 2006, 09:07 AM) [snapback]361567[/snapback]</div>

It is my hope, my good doctor, that the moderators of this BB would not let name calling go on unchecked. I do not like being referred to as a dog - for obvious and less obvious reasons - all of which you will be able to discern and protect against.

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

David [/b]
Click to expand...

You're a conservative db that courtesy does not extend to you or your ilk! [attachmentid=5911]

Wildkow

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Dec 13 2006, 08:52 AM) [snapback]361549[/snapback]</div>

Ahh yes... join a conversation and start pinning labels - ie "liberal left" - on people, and condemning everyone who you see as belonging to that group. great move.

As i stated before, it was a nickname that was already in use when i showed up here... I don't mean any offense by it, however old habits die hard and sometimes i may slip - i do try to use the proper nomenclature since i was asked to. I would hope you can forgive the occasional slip. [/b]
Click to expand...

Liberal and Liberal Left are not among the Political Prerogative terms listed in the Wiki.

Wildkow

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Dec 13 2006, 09:13 AM) [snapback]361572[/snapback]</div>

If you want to get into it, we can extend that further to people who stick labels on others, call them "facilitators of evil", etc... you aren't an innocent here who was picked on by the school bully, so don't act like it. On the two occasions you've pointed it out, i have apologized, and explained that it was a nickname i saw already in place and assumed it was ok to use - i was wrong, and am working to break myself of the habit. By all means, call for my head if you want, i think the mods and others on the forums will see it for what it truly is and ignore your pleas.

[/b]
Click to expand...

It's quite easy to go back and edit a post to remove and or amend certain remarks.

Wildkow

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Dec 13 2006, 09:53 AM) [snapback]361614[/snapback]</div>

This is my final post in response to this subject of nicknames and name calling. You can feel free to continue to post here about it all you want, but i feel that i've stated my intentions and apologized enough.

I find it odd that you demand no name calling from others, but are unwilling to accept the same stipulations for yourself, regardless of what the actual words or connotations are. You site "normal decent behavior", something that you have quite frequently thrown out the window.

And apparently i can't find the by-laws myself - the only thing i see are the two stickies at the top of FHOP, which say nothing about this. So please, be a kind and gentle soul and direct me where to go to read these by-laws you hold so dear.

*edit*
My apologies evan, was typing as you posted. [/b]
Click to expand...

I think his singular request is that you not refer to him as doberman or as anything to do with a dog. It is quite simple, other terms are up for debate and/or censorship from the Mod's if they will do so.

Wildkow

Wildkow · Dec 14, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Dec 13 2006, 12:31 PM) [snapback]361809[/snapback]</div>

Newton beats Einstein in polls of scientists and the public

The case made for each is here

As for calling people Einstein ... I hear more people called Bozo than I do Einstein. Does that mean Bozo the Clown is really the pre-eminent physicist of all time? Just asking. [/b]
Click to expand...

LOL! My home town is sometimes referred to as the "Bozone" can you guess where that is?

Wildkow

Wildkow · Dec 14, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Dec 13 2006, 12:48 PM) [snapback]361820[/snapback]</div>

In what way is Gates better than Jobs, aside from having more money and a company that didn't didn't toss him out on his nice person 20 years ago when it had almost total market share?

[/b]
Click to expand...

Let me take a shot at this if you don't mind.

The real genius behind Apple was Steve Wozniak. Jobs was a money and organizational guy (businessman) albeit a good one. Gates was both the author of some of his earlier programs and compliers but the money and organizational guy as well.

Wildkow

eagle33199 · Dec 14, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alnilam @ Dec 13 2006, 06:58 PM) [snapback]361945[/snapback]</div>

This is juvenile. In this world there are probabilities and possibilities. They are not equal. Virtually anything is possible but far less is probable. I don't have to spend my time proving things you imagine and for which nobody in my community thinks worth any consideration. It's your hypothesis: you show some evidence. This is the religious logic: I believe in God...prove me wrong. Belief isn't fact.

Ask your mother to explain time to you. Maybe the twin paradox, to start out with a light subject from the book. Then maybe work into the heavier concepts like the geometry of space, elementary particles, the cosmic background anisotropy and, perhaps, Hawking radiation. I'm sure she'll do fine (if she has a solid background in physics.)

Einstein was just a genius, but that's it......

He simply revolutionized Newton, who as I say, was probably the most brilliant scientist of all time. A little study here will go a long way instead of just stating things and then telling us you are somewhat out of touch with the subject. You have to be able to recognize "hard" before you can tell us what is just average genius.
[/b]
Click to expand...

I've stated what i needed - all of his work that was worth anything came from when he was involved with his first wife. He did pretty much nothing either before or after their relationship, which is a little suspicious, thats all i'm saying.

And my mother can explain most of that stuff, we've had long discussions about it. And no, she doesn't have a background in physics, she's been a middle school spanish teacher my entire life.

We do agree that Newton was probably the most brilliant. All I've used facts to support my opinions so far - the only time i said i wasn't well schooled in the subject was when i was asked for specific names of other physicists better than Einstein - i stated that i don't know names and that i don't keep up with every breakthrough in physics. that doesn't mean that i don't know my history or historical figures.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Dec 14 2006, 03:26 AM) [snapback]362076[/snapback]</div>

It's quite easy to go back and edit a post to remove and or amend certain remarks.

Wildkow

I think his singular request is that you not refer to him as doberman or as anything to do with a dog. It is quite simple, other terms are up for debate and/or censorship from the Mod's if they will do so.

Wildkow
[/b]
Click to expand...

Yes, it is easy to go back and edit posts, however on a message board i don't feel it's appropriate, aside from fixing spelling or grammar errors. Editing previous posts is pretty much an underhanded way or trying to bolster up an argument or change facts - other people have gone in and completely deleted posts before, and i find actions like that juvenile. I'll leave my posts as they are.

And yes, i understood the request, apologized several times, and explained myself. We've beaten this horse to death, lets not try to stir up the trouble again.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Dec 14 2006, 03:50 AM) [snapback]362078[/snapback]</div>

Let me take a shot at this if you don't mind.

The real genius behind Apple was Steve Wozniak. Jobs was a money and organizational guy (businessman) albeit a good one. Gates was both the author of some of his earlier programs and compliers but the money and organizational guy as well.

Wildkow
[/b]
Click to expand...

Gates was a business man. He went to Harvard for pre-law before he dropped out. From what i can read of history, he only ever wrote one program himself - everything else was simply running the business side of it and providing the "technological vision".

Jobs, on the other hand, essentially created the personal computer market in the 70's and 80's. He had almost total market share when he was ousted from Apple. As i stated, he purchased Pixar and made it what it is today, and created a new computer company, NeXT, which ended up revolutionizing Apple later on.

Jobs recognized the power of Unix back in 1985 - it was the reason he was ousted from Apple. He saw that Unix OS's were the way to go, but others in the company didn't follow his vision and essentially outmaneuvered him.

So i ask you, who is the better person: One that created an industry and dominated that industry the entire time he's been involved in it, leading the way in revolutionary software, or the guy who wrote a compiler, purchased an OS, and ran a company?

Proco · Dec 14, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Dec 14 2006, 04:39 AM) [snapback]362077[/snapback]</div>

LOL! My home town is sometimes referred to as the "Bozone" can you guess where that is?
[/b]
Click to expand...

Bozeman, Montana

Alnilam · Dec 14, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Dec 14 2006, 06:29 AM) [snapback]362109[/snapback]</div>

I've stated what i needed - all of his work that was worth anything came from when he was involved with his first wife. He did pretty much nothing either before or after their relationship, which is a little suspicious, thats all i'm saying.

And my mother can explain most of that stuff, we've had long discussions about it. And no, she doesn't have a background in physics, she's been a middle school spanish teacher my entire life.

[/b]
Click to expand...

Well there you have it: good, well-backed research. You are "suspicious" so there probably IS something there. Now you have me curious too. Couldn't you give us a small factual hint about what the first Mrs. Einstein did with respect to special or general relativity? I can't find anything myself and I have a pretty good library on science. You must have some evidence. There was that TV program, but I suspect your suspicions run deeper than that. There must be some writings that I missed, surely something of her own.

Here's what people in the field think:

http://womenshistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/...le/world/17/4/2

Or if you really want to do a lot of reading:

http://www.esterson.org/einsteinwife2.htm

But why trust them?

Wildkow · Dec 15, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Dec 14 2006, 06:29 AM) [snapback]362109[/snapback]</div>

I've stated what i needed - all of his work that was worth anything came from when he was involved with his first wife. He did pretty much nothing either before or after their relationship, which is a little suspicious, thats all i'm saying.

And my mother can explain most of that stuff, we've had long discussions about it. And no, she doesn't have a background in physics, she's been a middle school spanish teacher my entire life.

We do agree that Newton was probably the most brilliant. All I've used facts to support my opinions so far - the only time i said i wasn't well schooled in the subject was when i was asked for specific names of other physicists better than Einstein - i stated that i don't know names and that i don't keep up with every breakthrough in physics. that doesn't mean that i don't know my history or historical figures.

Yes, it is easy to go back and edit posts, however on a message board i don't feel it's appropriate, aside from fixing spelling or grammar errors. Editing previous posts is pretty much an underhanded way or trying to bolster up an argument or change facts - other people have gone in and completely deleted posts before, and i find actions like that juvenile. I'll leave my posts as they are.

And yes, i understood the request, apologized several times, and explained myself. We've beaten this horse to death, lets not try to stir up the trouble again.

Gates was a business man. He went to Harvard for pre-law before he dropped out. From what i can read of history, he only ever wrote one program himself - everything else was simply running the business side of it and providing the "technological vision".

Jobs, on the other hand, essentially created the personal computer market in the 70's and 80's. He had almost total market share when he was ousted from Apple. As i stated, he purchased Pixar and made it what it is today, and created a new computer company, NeXT, which ended up revolutionizing Apple later on.

Jobs recognized the power of Unix back in 1985 - it was the reason he was ousted from Apple. He saw that Unix OS's were the way to go, but others in the company didn't follow his vision and essentially outmaneuvered him.

So i ask you, who is the better person: One that created an industry and dominated that industry the entire time he's been involved in it, leading the way in revolutionary software, or the guy who wrote a compiler, purchased an OS, and ran a company? [/b]
Click to expand...

I'll have to take this under consideration. Certainly I would have to say that Jobs is a bit more likeable than Gates.

Your views on editing posts don't take into account "Foot and Mouth" syndrome something that I have fallen prey to on one or perhaps two occasions at the most.

Thanks for your reply...

Wildkow

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Dec 14 2006, 06:45 AM) [snapback]362113[/snapback]</div>

Bozeman, Montana [/b]
Click to expand...

Right'O here's a dancing nana for you . . . [attachmentid=5922]

Wildkow

p.s. Before drugs came into vogue we referred to it as Boozeman.

For the poster formerly known as Doberman

eagle33199 Platinum Member

dbermanmd New Member

eagle33199 Platinum Member

Proco Senior Member

dbermanmd New Member

eagle33199 Platinum Member

dbermanmd New Member

Chuck. Former Honda Enzyte Driver

eagle33199 Platinum Member

Alnilam The One in the Middle

daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

Chuck. Former Honda Enzyte Driver

Wildkow New Member

Wildkow New Member

Attached Files:

banana.gif

Wildkow New Member

Wildkow New Member

eagle33199 Platinum Member

Proco Senior Member

Alnilam The One in the Middle

Wildkow New Member

Attached Files:

nana2.gif

About PriusChat

Quick Navigation

Like us on Facebook

Buy us a beer!

Useful Searches

For the poster formerly known as Doberman

eagle33199 Platinum Member

dbermanmd New Member

eagle33199 Platinum Member

Proco Senior Member

dbermanmd New Member

eagle33199 Platinum Member

dbermanmd New Member

Chuck. Former Honda Enzyte Driver

eagle33199 Platinum Member

Alnilam The One in the Middle

daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

Chuck. Former Honda Enzyte Driver

Wildkow New Member

Wildkow New Member

Attached Files:

banana.gif

Wildkow New Member

Wildkow New Member

eagle33199 Platinum Member

Proco Senior Member

Alnilam The One in the Middle

Wildkow New Member

Attached Files:

nana2.gif