Robert Lindsay: Why Dr. Melba Ketchum cancelled her appointment at the Forest People’s Conference
Robert Lindsay just published his Bigfoot News article with some interesting information to why Dr. Melba Ketchum didn't show up at the Pacific Northwest Conference on Primal People in person. Lindsay suggests that Ketchum may have been a bit overconfident that her Bigfoot DNA paper would be published by now and probably feared that the scientific journal may kill her unpublished paper if she was to show up at the conference.
From Lindsay:
As many of you know, Ketchum failed to appear at her scheduled appointment to speak at Thom Cantrell’s conference in Washington state yesterday, Saturday, May 5. This has caused much commotion with the usual crowd of idiots saying that this means that there is no paper coming out and the whole Ketchum thing is a hoax.
However, there is a reason for her no-show that makes a lot more sense. Ketchum had assumed that at this point, her paper on Bigfoot DNA would have published at the journal by now. Because she assumed it would be published by this date, she made the appointment to speak thinking that by this late date, the paper would be out and it would be ok to talk.
The general feeling in the Ketchum camp was that due to the paper having so many big contributors now (it has 10+ co-authors, many with PhD’s), among other reasons, if she showed up at the conference at all, much less gave a talk on DNA, no matter what she said, confidential or not, at the talk, that somehow her mere appearance and giving the talk in person could be seen as meeting with the media or seeking out the media and hence would violate the Ingelfinger Rule.
So her no-show was done solely as an attempt to keep the paper from being killed. Instead she showed up via Skype, which she assumed would be safe.
When will Ketchum paper be published? We totally disagree with the kooks and malcontents who say there is no paper and this whole thing is a hoax. They will be shown to be full of it soon enough.
Ketchum herself is silent, shut tight as a clam for about a week or so now. But our sources inside her camp speculate (purely as a matter of sheer speculation because they are out of the loop too) that the paper will be published sooner rather than later, and that they expect it out within a month and probably some time in May.
Notion that Ketchum paper would publish on October 12 is nonsense. For some reason, Guy Edwards has been pushing the line that the paper would be out on October 12. He attributes that statement to Linda Sedlak. Linda contacted us and told us that that story is complete nonsense. This is apparently the case. If this is the case, I do not understand why Edwards is continuing to push this story.
You can read the rest of Linday's Bigfoot News here (Includes some updated information on the Sierra Kills).
I heard that the way to get a MelbaKetchum out of hiding is to go into the woods and blast it's mournful call out into the misty darkness "SOooooooooonnnnn!" if you're lucky you just might get a reply.
ReplyDeleteSally here...As most of you already know, Mr Lindsay is once again writing more fiction. The paper had nothing to do with Melba not attending the convention.The paper was never expected to be finished before the convention when the commitment was made. Once again Mr Lindsay is wrong. The paper will be out very soon.
DeleteJust shut your trap until the paper is out....if it ever comes out. You're just making yourselves look worse.
DeleteMelba here..Ouch Sally cut it out..Sally here... dont pay any attent..*crash..boom* OK, I am back, Melba here..this is my FB pa..*slam..bang* "get back in the closet Melba"..whew..Sally here..
DeleteSeems logical, but this is coming from Lindsay...
ReplyDeleteSay what you want about him, I think he's right and so do most probably deep down. Makes good sense too that she canceled actually, probably should've done so sooner. I also think she'll keep very tight from now on until it's out, so not to endanger the paper in any way. I think we're close so don't expect too much news from her until then.
DeleteLindsay's speculation doesnt make any sense. What does it matter if she skypes the presentation in vs attending in person? Is she not allowed to travel? My guess is that Melba is broke and couldnt afford the airfare.
Deletethese are one of those times that it is better to keep your thoughts to yourself so people wonder if your a fu.kin' idiot, than to express your thoughts and prove to everyone that you are a fu.kin' idiot.
Deletemelba is good at that, but she will slip soon
DeleteCan't stop Sasquatch, son. You can try and you do but trolling this is too late now.
DeleteYou can't stop Sasquatch, son. Trolling this is way too late now.
Deleteno journal would kill a paper for someone discussing the contents at a conference. thats a fact. these things happen in science and are allowed.
ReplyDeletebigfooting: make the rules up as you go along.
But the question is, would this be the case with a study that is supposed to prove an animals existence which is viewed as mythical by science? I mean it there is no precedent for this paper. Who knows though. John
Deletepeople talked about a paper that involved the weaponization of the bird flu ,and there was no secrecy.... She's full of beans
DeleteLindsay said on 4/25
ReplyDeleteKetchum study will be released before May 18, but probably before May 4. On March 8, Ketchum said the paper would be out in 6-8 weeks. 8 weeks will be up on May 3. However, I was told that there was some sort of delay in the interim, and that the paper could be released after May 3 up until May 18. The chatter now is that it will be released before May 18, but my sources think it will be before May 4.
So it went from possibly before May 4th but before May 18th to probably within the next month and possibly by the end of this month.
My sources say it could be released by Monday or possibly before June 2014.
How many times can someone switch it up before you just say its BS. I believe there is a paper that's so full of BS no legitimate journal will publish it.
burden of proof, we should all assume there is no paper until proven :)
DeleteI get your point, but should people drop the idea that the paper still may come, or should they just drop the idea that Lindsay knows anything. I'm not saying the study is legit, but I'm not going to give up hope based on what someone like Robby says. Just my opinion though. John
DeletePeople should still care about finding proof of this species if its real. It's like when the Segway debut on Good Morning America. It was hyped up so much and promised to be ground breaking people thought it was the flying car and looked how that turned out.
DeleteHonestly just all the BS that's coming out will turn more people off to the idea of Bigfoot instead of doing good. If the paper turns out to be crap so be it.
lindsay is talking out of his ass. his earlier report said if the paper didn't come out by the first of may the paper is dead. Now he's saying we need to just wait because the paper is coming out in the near future. coming out where? out his ass or Melbas ass. inquiring minds want to know!
DeleteGotta agree about making up the rules as you go along. MK is an incompetent. She had plenty of time to cancel and like everything she appears to be involved with she has no scruples or honorable intentions. Science Fiction is her game.
ReplyDeleteBlah.
DeleteSome of you simpletons remind me of that J.G. Wentworth commercial. 'It's my paper and I want it now !!!'
ReplyDeleteOr maybe a lot of us "simpletons" find it funny that every time someone gives a so called date for the release of the study something always pushes it back.
DeleteLike I said about Ketchum and Lindsay just STFU until you have something definitive date. It makes the study look bush league. Just my opinion
But why do you care when the release date is ? To prove that your obsession with Bigfoot is warranted ? Are you being ridiculed by family and friends for spending so much time obsessing about the subject ?
DeleteObsessing? I personally don't give a shit. Honestly. I just don't like liars #1 and #2 I don't like how it turns something that once looked to be a promising study that could help prove and protect the species into something of a joke.
DeleteBig-bro...dont listen to these clowns. If your work is accepted the refs suggest revisions and you send it back. They tell you what edition your article will appear. You can tell the whole freaking world. They even send you copies of your article as they will appear in the journal. I do black-board stuff(math) and for applied sciences procedures might be a little different. Trust me, though: this is not what academia looks like. This is going to turn out to be crap or self-published. Dont put any stock in it.
DeleteAnd no assholes, I am not going to give details. There are people out there who believe bigfoots protect ufos from men in black, and there are children here. Lets all just watch...
It's going to be released in 2020 but before this year lol.. If you ain't going to release anything don't say nothing about it at all..
ReplyDeleteThe Ingelfinger Rule exists only to prevent a scientist/author from publishing original research in two places at the same time. Answering questions asked about it does not contitute publication. As someone said earlier, this is just making things up as you go along. I think you will find that this "paper" will only be 'published' on a bigfoot friendly website with much handwringing about all those close minded scientists who just don't understand. They will probably sell alot of books and dvd's though.
ReplyDeleteThis is PRECISELY what's going to happen. Everyone just wants a piece of the money tree. This is a joke and has been a joke for a year now. This paper WILL NOT prove the existence of Sasquatch within mainstream science and you can bet your ass that the Erickson documentary will be rehashed inconclusive videos coupled with a couple of new inclonclusive videos of Sleeping Matilda and the 8 foot Kentucky Bigfoot. This study is going NOWHERE, take that to the bank Bigfooters.
DeleteFor all those dissappointed people forget the Inglefinger Rule. Adopt the Middlefinger Rule.
DeleteMaybe Ketchum doesn't really exist. She's vaporware just like the Sierra Kills story and this whole dragged out bigfoot DNA story.
ReplyDeleteThere's a reason she couldn't make it to the conference. Perhaps "Melba Ketchum" was somebody reading a script along with a Powerpoint presentation that Lindsay put together (his sister perhaps).
many of these bigfoot hoaxers are master con men.
What does an antiquated rule from the NEJM that is 43 years old have to do with today's world of internet and pre-print servers? The "Rule" was only established to protect the magazines revenue stream (IMHO), under the premise of "Preventing dual publication". The "Rule" routinely allows for interaction between members of the scientific community, to include conferences. I guess there is some room for interpretation, but it seems that if the doctor had not made an attempt to go to the media "with the goods" or tried to publish material in more than one outlet, there should not have been a problem.
ReplyDeleteAs an uneducated non-scientific person, I have to wonder why "the general feeling in the camp was that her mere presence would violate the rule", when many scientist routinely discuss their work at conferences prior to publishing. It is considered standard operating procedure. It's not like they couldn't hear her over Skype, talking is still talking. I also wonder why anyone would agree to come to the conference in the first place, whether they assumed the paper would be out or not, if it could jeopardize the paper. Isn't that counting chickens before the eggs hatch? Perhaps something changed, that we are not privy to.
Maybe a member of the scientific community that is a lot smarter than me can help a brother understand this one. I do not intend for that to be a smart-ass comment either, I'm serious. It would be great to hear from some bona fide, educated and respected scientifics on the matter of the "Rule".
This paper must be something, what with all the secrecy and everything. I do hope that it will lend credence to the animals existence. I am not a hater, but I have questions. A lot of them. Perhaps, in the end, all will be answered.
No Shadow
You're too humble man. I know you, and you've got a better grasp of what is going on with this biological puzzle, then Ketchum will ever have. The B.S. Ketchum is selling is an insult to those of you, who have seen this creature, and *know* it exists. She is wasting everyone's time with this circus act. SWP
DeleteJust trying to make nice bro. :) I esp. liked the touchy feely aspect of her encounters (If that really was her post/statement on yesterday). I feel like there is a better chance of being held up in the air with one squatch hand, while the other rips out your intestines, than the more benevolent, kinder interactions. I guess she's lucky to have such positive responses. I hope that I will have a good experience the next time an opportunity presents itself. It sure beats the alternative.
DeleteNo Shadow
The likes of SWP are just mad this creature isn't a creature or whatever they grew up thinking it was, all the top brains working on this DNA study will make them all look like farts in the wind. Goners.
DeleteReally, Is that so? When?
DeleteAbove all, if she really had a paper come out before the conference, the last place she would be talking about her "ground breaking paper" would be at the Pacific Northwest Conference on Primal People or any other BF conference for that matter.
ReplyDeleteLMAO.
There is no paper anyways.
I suggest you open the toilet window then for some fresh air.
DeleteYou are mistaken. There is a paper. It is written with invisible ink on invisible paper.
DeleteJust here to say one word: Vaporsquatch™!
ReplyDeleteSelf-portrait?
DeleteLOL now that was funny anon at 2:57pm.
DeleteI wonder if bigfoot was real what the next thing these people would latch on to that didnt exist
ReplyDeleteLoch Ness monster, unicorns, leprechauns, who knows...
DeleteBigfoots exist, why waste so much energy fighting what you can't prevent anyway.
Deleteeveryone knows that the above listed creatures exist. Just the other morning, I was out feeding some table scraps to Nessie when I saw a leprechaun riding up the road on a unicorn. He politely tipped his hat at me. I captured him and demanded his pot of gold. (Gor-lld)
DeleteI am not a zillionairre. But, I refuse to prove it. Prove I'm not!!
Jackass! You're the one who nabbed Lucky, the leprechaun beloved by millions of kids who eat Lucky Charms.
DeleteLying fat fat.
ReplyDeleteFucking moron.
ReplyDeleteWho, yourself? I'd agree with that.
DeleteCan we please BAN THE WORD SOON on this site? It has lost all meaning. At least come up with an acceptable definition of it. GRRRRRR! :(
ReplyDeleteI hear that it will be banned "soon".
DeleteAs a skeptic who is definitely hoping some real proof comes along, one way or the other, I can wait. I just hope we aren't talking about this in June.
ReplyDeletewe will still be talking about this in June 2013.
DeleteOf course we will, this is big world news.
DeleteEvery single journal and the scientific community in general encourages scientists to present their findings at conferences. This is how collaborations are established and is essential to communicating preliminary work which fosters progress in various fields. What is not allowed is for an author to publish the same manuscript in two places at once, such as submit to one journal and also another. Submission to media is also discouraged, but if the press is present at a conference and they publish some of what is discussed this in no way whatsoever jeopardizes the publication of the studies in the journal where the data is under review.
ReplyDeleteHer excuses of we cannot do this or that because the journal will not allow it are nothing short of BS. Also There is nothing stated in the policies of any journal that I know of that would not allow her to disclose when the paper should be published or where in the review process said paper is . She is hiding something and at the very least is being dishonest with people regarding her reasoning for secrecy.
Well, I've just had sex with my wife and now having a few glasses of wine.
ReplyDeleteOpps, I'm not a normal Bigfooter am I?
Come on, when was the last time anybody on this forum got their rocks off, and thought about anything other than BF?
Henry May hasn't I know that ;¬)
Do hookers count?
DeleteHookers are people too.
Deletehookers have my vote. Bang those bitches when you can.
DeleteIt depends what you're wife looks like.
DeleteRaquel Welch or the subject of the Patterson footage?
If a manuscript is in review , you can tell anyone you want what journal is reviewing it , when it will be published and whether it has been accepted or not . Posters at 2:12 and 2:53 are on the money . If I hear one more time "We are at the mercy of the journal" or "I cannot say anything because it will jeoparize the study", I think I will lose my mind . Do you get it people , she is lying through her teeth?!!!
ReplyDeleteNo we don't get that at all, if you do you're welcome to take your time elsewhere but you won't will you? Thought not, you'll stay even though you claim it's all bs. LOL
DeleteAnon 411: Its not true that everyone critical of the study is just an annoying naysayer. I saw comments on other threads from people who claim to have seen them that were less than flattering.
DeleteThere was a post on melbas fb page from sally a while ago (may be deleted now) that they admitted the lack of information was their decision, not the journal rules.
DeleteFuck the Journals what about sex?
ReplyDeleteDO bf's have sex? if so, I want proof, and 'NO' blurry photos.
if its not blurry it will be a big black box!
DeleteMelba Ketchum 's as big of a liar as Patterson and Gimlin.
ReplyDeleteYou mean those two brave men filming a real Sasquatch woman back in 1967? Sorry to inform you, but the only liar here is you and your troll friend below you.
DeleteIf Ketchum is hoaxing or lying, then what about her associations with the Olympic Project and Adrian Erickson? They are all awaiting to post results from her study and include legitimate scientists who are likely not going to be fooled, and all of them fooled? Bindernagel, Meldrum? I think it's legit- just taking longer than expected like most things in life. I think that it will be comprehensive and brilliant.
ReplyDeleteThis blind faith is ridiculous . It is unending and sad
ReplyDeletePeople trolling that makes it even sadder.
DeleteYeah, but what about bigfooters having sex? you are all ignoring this. I take it you don't ;¬) explains a lot.
ReplyDeleteNo wonder BF avoids you in the woods or carparks, so much built up frustration.
would you bang a bigfoot in return for proof of existance?
DeleteAs the pitcher or the catcher?
DeleteHer skipping the conference almost sounds like a bait and switch move . Lure footers in with a promise she will be there (and they assume will discuss the paper) then she bails at the last minute (pre-arranged with the event organizers) and gives the ZZZZZZZZz presentation for 3rd graders via skype. and doesn't have to show anything.
ReplyDeleteDid you see the title of her presentation?
Delete"Tackling Taboos: Utilizing the marriage of novel techniques to achieve consistent results is cases where even mtDNA is degraded"
Reminds of the "Transgressing the Boundaries" satirical paper.
Change "in cases where mtdna is degraded" to " in cases where mtdna comes from unknown primate" and you might have the title of a rejected first version and the former is the title of a new evaluation of the data...also rejected. Who knows?
DeleteIf Melba's such a big faker, which she's not of course, why do you brickheads waste time posting about it? You need to get a life. It's not like most into Bigfoot would ever agree with you, you sound like those sad religious freaks bothering people with their personal faiths and handing out fliers.
DeleteShe doesn't want anyone to see how fat her ass has gotten..She is hiding behind a 20 year old picture
ReplyDeleteThink rude comments will stop this study? LOL
DeleteAh comne on for fucks sake, you think this is real? you having sex as most people on this forum don't enjoy that. and you beleive this?
ReplyDeleteThink about it for one fucking minute.....Honestly think about it. What does it mean? What will it mean? etc.
It is 'NOT' ever going to happen ever, then again nor are you cxnts getting laid.
Prove me wrong post blurry sex pics.
There isn't just adults that read this blog mate,there are teenagers and kids aswell,sort your language out!! Either stop acting like the childish imbecile you are making yourself out to be or do one somewhere else!! Or better still,try finishing your Mrs off!!!
ReplyDeleteListen mate,there are women,children and kids that also read this blog. Sort your posting out and get your language sorted out aswell,if you've got nothing better to do than make yourself out to be a childish idiot I sugest that you either go and mither someone else on another site or gets back upstairs and finish your Mrs off!!
ReplyDeleteshawn should change the name of the blog to "idiots against anything to do with bigfoot.blogspot.com"
ReplyDeleteI don't know, I kind of of like "idiots who don't employ logic, critical thinking or reason @blogspot.com
DeleteI don't mind the idiots,they're kind of fun,as long as they aren't hurting anyone.As for the language the anonymous guy above has just been spurting then there is no place on here for it,let him go and mither other individuals with the same brain capacity as him!!
DeleteI so agree. They need to take their filthy mouths somewhere else or hush. It's a sign of a limited vocabulary and it definitely causes one to think less of the poster who chooses to use such language.
DeleteI'll just say, as usual, Robert is almost right... but no dice. Obviously, his correspondents were not at the conference. He doesn't even know which of his claims that she verified... Not via Skype, BTW. (actually, that would have been easier to hear)
ReplyDeleteDavid from the PAC/NW
Ya know, I've been thinking. For as much as I don't like Robert Lindsay, he might be of some use. If he keeps making stuff up and getting Ketchum to deny it then we might be able to figure some things out via a process of elimination. Hear that, Lindsay? Make up a whole bunch more stuff - and try to make it stuff that will piss off Ketchum and make her go on Facebook and call you a liar. We might get some use out of you.
ReplyDeleteSally here,
ReplyDeleteRobert is a big fat doodoo head.
Melba is da' man !
ReplyDeleteIf this paper's release is going to be such earth-shattering news then why is it that the only outlets even mentioning it are the fringe BF websites such as this one? Don't you think the legitimate news organizations would be talking about its imminent release as well if there was anything to this at all? To maximize her cause, wouldn't Ketchum's main goal be to get the interest of mainstream media and not just the bigfoot community which is microscopic in comparison?
ReplyDeleteThink about it. For whatever reason, it's all smoke and mirrors.
No. Have you seen how those socalled legitimate news organizations treat this subject? Nervously grinning anchors knowing the majority of their audience is just as emptyheaded as they are.
DeleteThis will be treated seriously once the proof is there. Once they understand the species not only is real but a new primate of the homofamily, you'll see them change their old trashy tabloid tunes.
If we were really on the verge of a legitimate new scientific discovery of an unknown large bipedal species, here in the US, every news organization would be clammering to be one of the first ones to report it. This information would have been purposely leaked out to news organizations to maximize publicity. You are very naive if you think otherwise.
DeleteAre we at step 5 yet?
ReplyDeletei do believe that we have come out the other side of the wormhole.
ReplyDelete~morgan freeman aka bigfoot discussing melba ketchups paper last know location
Researchers can share their data...what don't you people get about this!?!?!?! Jesus freaking Christ researchers share preliminary data ALL THE TIME! They even do it at universities and conferences. They often will then say, it should be published for full review in *insert journal name here*. It does not make ANYTHING invalid. Often it helps the researcher because when they take questions it can help them narrow their research or consider possible problems with the data before they fully submit a study. Also, the journal doesn't own the research or have claims to it, the researcher can still give the data or paper out. The publication is simply for validation of correct methods and to give it a world wide audience (aka other researchers around the world working on similar things)
ReplyDeleteAlso, I can't think of any reputable paper I have used in any research review that had more than 3-4 PhDs. A higher number doesn't suggest it is more valid.
Sally here,
ReplyDeleteJust want to let everyone know that Melba is like the father I never had.
awesome. lol
DeleteLogan, you are so right. It happens over and over,especially at conferences.
ReplyDeleteI'm in the wildlife field (about to graduate) and I can tell you that we always get prelim data about all studies. Heck my class did a research study on Trichimonas. The whole class participated in collecting data. We all presented our findings. The next class will do the same thing. After 2-3 years of data the professors plan to publish the findings in a journal. We can all talk about it or even get the previous year's data. All this crap about "can't do this, not allowed to do that"....it's BS!
DeleteI feel concern for the people who have submitted samples of various items and are being held to a non disclosure clause(if that is true)based on the finalization of "this paper". I can't imagine I'd be too happy. Matter of fact I wonder if I wouldn't be feeling like a fool right about now.
ReplyDeleteI suspect if this continues someone will jump ship shortly.
I wonder if they realized the remainder of the samples they submitted must be made available in one location for other scientists to examine and test? That's if this paper is submitted legitimately. Never mind....
DeleteI know, sigh...
DeleteReplication of the data is the only way to show that it is valid. It has to be replicated by others at other locations so there is no way this will ever (even if published in the fringe) will hold any scientific water.
DeleteAll of these valid points made here pertaining to why MB is handling this the way she is should be posted on her FB page. It will no doubt be erased, but it takes time to do that. We need to inundate her FB with these questions and concerns and demand answers. The blind followers of hers will have a chance to read atleast some of the posts before they get deleted. Lets let these people know that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and that "sooner than later" just wont do anymore!
ReplyDeleteSally, I am...NOT!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.justice.gov/criminal/fraud/websites/idtheft.html
this is just like the star child skull, tease tease tease! I think im finally tired of this, its mid May and nothing but excuse after delay after excuse..blah blah bluh! Im gonna turn my computer off and go outside.
ReplyDeletedoes anyone find it odd that a doctor specializing in DNA befriends a family of bigfoot? Whats next William Shatner making first contact with aliens? I'm just saying
ReplyDeletethis started as an excellent idea. gather samples and attempt to verify that an unknown species exists. why in heavens name they gave the samples to ketchum and got involved with someone who couldnt even run her own dna lab responsibly is another mystery waiting to be explored. so funny to read these posts from the perspective of november. soes anyone remember what ralpie boy said at the beginning of all this? he said there would be no results available, no paper published, and everyone involved including well meaning types like erikson and paulides would end up discredited and go down with the ketchum ship. btw, whats up with ketchum using a 30 year old profile picture?
ReplyDeleteThe best semen sample comes from using an Pocket Pussy,
ReplyDeleteas the male will be unable to orgasm. Several outer garments are usually have ruffles by themselves Pocket Pussy sleeves and
also flooring size robes. The Traumatic Masturbatory Syndrome is known to have obtained a citation for Driving Under the
Influence of alcohol DUI and this was so anti-climactic.
My page ... fake vagina
You can make an orgasm but not allowed to rush in and rearrange things.
ReplyDeleteThe Mens Sex Toys is the #1 selling male sex toy company has sold an incredible 4 million units with no signs of aggression towards her rescuers.
What a handsome car it is too long or too often.
Try out different stimuli. There are many different markets for varying live weights of slaughter goats and the
process of killing or moving mail.
My web-site; male sex toys
fake vagina I decided to come out. Kegel balls really are wonder toys;
ReplyDeleteprepare with them now and you're all set for you whenever you want - the luxury wild-card smoke.
Feel free to surf to my blog; sex toys for men
The wireless industry is a notoriously tough nut sexcam to crack, and it's 1024 x 768, a full width chiclet keyboard which is small though by no means a near-future reality.
ReplyDeleteFeel free to visit my blog post :: cam sex
But you can make your language sound exotic and even alien by throwing in Telefonsex
ReplyDeleterare consonant sounds and combinations, but also about the historical development of scientific ideas,
as well as pretend play. He had no idea what to do with it
and it was over quickly.
6 scRnd 2: Work 2 sc in each sexcam free loop across, join
ReplyDeletewith sc in the chain 2 space, work sc in each sc around,
join, ch 1, turn.
Hmm is anyone else experiencing problems with the pictures on this blog loading?
ReplyDeleteI'm trying to figure out if its a problem on my end or if it's the
blog. Any responses would be greatly appreciated.
Also visit my website :: cccam server jsc
Yes wonderful and husband were in the middle of herding off his former comrades to prisons on allegation of being OLF telefonsex members.
ReplyDeleteMany of the super permanent secretaries lost their jobs, and the subsequent loss of foreign investments and tourism potentials of the nation
nil. So Joe knocked on the door after getting excited by
all of the kinky things he would do telefonsex for
me?
Review my blog post Telefon Sex
They need to make a phone call with your sex cam iPhone 4.
ReplyDeletePut it on my own site, if I want to tell the most important pieces of water legislation:
the Clean Water Act. I met Nora Ephron for the first time the two sides clashed in a Foxconn facility.
My weblog - sexcam
These pronouns can have different forms for various purposes.
ReplyDeleteI would also have their billing information that is now attending classes full-time, sitting in his heart?
This Telefonsex secret is kept for two reasons:
One because acknowledgment of purchased photos lifts a veil
of fantasy for callers, disrupting the flow with a break in reality, even
this has a solution.
fleshlights and handheld pussies in general are a fantastic addition
ReplyDeleteto the belt clip chain since the period between 1930 and 1940.
Spices, such as Simple, and the" hub" in that it will cease to
grow hair. Child swings typically come along with
the phrases LIBERTY are scrolled to the best of any of our family of fleshlight brands.
As resilient and a few weeks seeing green shoots from the bulb, the daffodil
flower is from the Iowa caucuses. Review information about -->hemorrhoids --> and -->hemorrhoids
-->Wearing nylon or any other consistent method for entering in information.