Category: online spiele casino automaten

Quote em

quote em

Wettquoten zur Fußball Europameisterschaft Wer wird Europameister? Die Wettquoten der Favoriten bei der EM , Prognosen und vieles mehr. Juli Wer wird Europameister die aktuellen Wettquoten zur Fußball EM im Vergleich der Wettanbieter ➜ welcher Buchmacher hat die besten. Sportwetten und Quoten für Fußball Damen EM Qualifikation International.

em quote -

Seit ist Heinz als Berater in der Wettbranche aktiv und widmet sich in erster Linie dem Testen und Vergleichen der verschiedenen Wettanbieter im Internet. Die jeweils besten Wettquoten zu jeder Mannschaft werden dabei in roter Farbe angezeigt. Alle anderen Wettmöglichkeiten erscheinen mit Blick auf die Quoten der Wettanbieter annähernd gleich wahrscheinlich. Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Deswegen kann jede Mannschaft mit mehr oder weniger viel Glück Europameister werden. Folglich kann es kaum verwundern, dass so mancher Wettanbieter bereits sehnsüchtig an der Uhr zu drehen beginnt. Die Spielorte im Überblick:. Damit wären sie nach Frankreich und Spanien die dritte Nation, die als Weltmeister dann auch gleich Europameister wäre. Die EM Austragungsorte kannst du dir hier ansehen. In Frankreich wird all das keine Probleme machen. Auch beim Buchmacher Betway gibt es eine ähnliche Quotenverteilung wie bei Tipico. Bei einem EM-Turnier zeigt sich immer wieder, dass nicht automatisch die Mannschaften, die in der Qualifikation überragend waren, auch beim Turnier ganz vorne landen. Mit Klick auf das jeweilige Logo oder die jeweilige Quote kommst du direkt zum Wettanbieter: Auch hier haben wir uns für einen Buchmacher entscheiden, denn lediglich bet hatte für diese Wettart eine so umfassende Quoten Anzahl. Die Schweden liefern eine Wettquote von 6,00 dafür, dass ein Trainer per Kamerabild beim Nasepopeln erwischt wird. Eine Kombiwette bietet sich immer dann an, wenn du Favoritentipps miteinander verknüpfen möchtest. Bevor Qualifikation beginnt, scheinen nach den Annahmen der Buchmacher vor allem die Teams aus Frankreich, Deutschland, Spanien und Belgien für eine TopPlatzierung prädestiniert zu sein. Passiert das aber doch, dann findet sich beim schwedischen Bookie Betsson auch hierfür eine passende Quote. Bei Bet-at-home Sportwetten gäbe es dafür den fachen Wetteinsatz für mutige Tipper. Der Spielplan ist seit der Gruppenauslosung am

Quote em -

Fällt der Tor-Rekord eines Einzelspielers? O-Phase mit dem Achtelfinale. Ein allseits beliebter Klassiker wenn es um das Thema verrückte Wettquoten geht, sind die Flitzer-Wetten. Einige Überraschungen sind schon dabei. Die jeweiligen Gruppensieger und Gruppenzweiten haben sich auf jeden Fall für das Achtelfinale der Europameisterschaft qualifiziert, die Gruppenletzten sind hingegen bereits fix aus dem Turnier ausgeschieden.

Quote Em Video

TOP 20 E. M. Forster Quotes

For more multi bagger recommendations click here. Our experts panel will help you to get you those life-changing stocks, tomorrow's bluechips today.

The current market capitalisation stands at Rs 61, Verify your Moneycontrol account. Have you invested in these stocks?

You can track them better in your Portfolio. Keep me signed in Forgot Password? Track Eicher Motors on the go with the money control app. Sign in to post a message.

Remember me Keep me signed in. Don't have an account yet? Action in Eicher Motors. News Honda still in search of the elusive Royal Enfield rival Oct 22, News Ideas For Profit: Quality business, attractive valuation make Eicher Motors a long term buy Oct 09, She was born on February 8, in St.

Visit the LitQuotes blog to see them all. Some links on this site are affiliate links. If you make a purchase through these links LitQuotes will get some compensation.

A Feast for Crows. Emma by Jane Austen. Quotes by Author - Explore Quotes by Author. Rider Haggard — Kate Chopin — Popular Pages Daily Quote - Get your daily dose of classic literature here!

Random Quote - See a random quote from our large, curated quotations collection. Random Love Quote - Do you feel the love?

And that discrepancy seems enlarged by a considerable order of magnitude when we compare what we think the larger-scale events ought to look like with what we actually find.

And it has been paleontologists -- my own breed -- who have been most responsible for letting ideas dominate reality: Ever since Darwin, as philosopher Michael Ruse has recently said, paleontology has occasionally played the role of the difficult child.

But our usual mien has been bland, and we have proffered a collective tacit acceptance of the story of gradual adaptive change, a story that strengthened and became even more entrenched as the synthesis took hold.

And part of the fault for such a bizarre situation must come from a naive understanding of just what adaptation is all about.

We'll look at some of the larger patterns in the history of life in the next chapter -- along with the hypotheses currently offered as explanations.

Throughout it all, adaptation shines through as an important theme; there is every reason to hang on to that baby as we toss out the bathwater.

But before turning in depth to these themes, we need to take just one more, somewhat closer, look at the actual phenomenon of adaptation itself: Eldredge is agreeing that evolution occurs, and that adaptation via natural selection is real and important.

He is saying that as at paleontology needed to be more explicitly about the fact that evolution is not slow and steady, but rapid and static in turns.

The snippet that is quoted is deliberately chosen to suggest that Eldredge is admitting some deep error in evolutionary biology; but what he is saying is that some biologists have overlooked some data they should factor in, and that we should not expect that evolution will be gradual.

Gryphaea, Micraster, Zaphrentis none of which actually withstands close scrutiny. The most significant contributions of Eldredge and Gould's theory are the acceptance of patterns as preserved in the fossil record, and the recognition of stasis Lewin Hitherto, no morphological change had been equated with no data, and just ignored.

With the benefit of hindsight, it is amazing that palaeontologists could have accepted gradual evolution as a universal pattern on the basis of a handful of supposedly well-documented lineages e.

Gryphaea , Micraster , Zaphrentis none of which actually withstands close scrutiny. For example Micraster shows sudden appearances of new taxa Stokes , Figure 2 and relatively sudden changes in morphological features Drummond , figure 1.

The evidence that the vast majority of species appeared equally suddenly, had well-defined periods of existence, and then disappeared equally suddenly, was just ignored.

Furthermore, because evolution was known to be gradual, very few palaeontologists documented actual patterns preserved in the fossil record.

Eldredge and Gould did a great service in prompting a re-examination of the evidence. What are the "well-documented lineages" that Paul mentions?

Gryphaea is an extinct mollusk related to the oyster. Determining why the fossil oyster Gryphaea evolved the way it did is a classic riddle that has befuddled scientists since the publication of a provocative paper by paleontologist Edward Trueman in One of the best documented cases of evolution in the fossil record, the paper showed how the oyster changed from being as small as a penny and flat to larger and coiled, Jones said.

The ironic thing is that Gryphaea , Micraster , and Zaphrentis would probably be recognized as three different "kinds" by a creationist, who would then claim that the sudden changes in morphological features observed by Paul are just variations with their respective "kinds".

But does Paul feel that evolution has been discredited? At the end of the paper on page we find this:. Indeed, the real merit of all three major ideas discussed in this chapter see p.

Even if all three should eventually be rejected, they will have advanced the state of knowledge of the fossil record and rendered invaluable service to palaeontology and evolutionary science in general.

Evolutionary science hasn't been harmed, but rendered an "invaluable service". These are not the words of an opponent of evolution.

Hooker, July 22nd , in Darwin F. The letter is reproduced entirely below, from Project Gutenberg's online copy of More Letters:. I have just read Ball's Essay.

The rapid development as far as we can judge of all the higher plants within recent geological times is an abominable mystery.

Certainly it would be a great step if we could believe that the higher plants at first could live only at a high level; but until it is experimentally [proved] that Cycadeae, ferns, etc.

Saporta believes that there was an astonishingly rapid development of the high plants, as soon [as] flower-frequenting insects were developed and favoured intercrossing.

I should like to see this whole problem solved. I have fancied that perhaps there was during long ages a small isolated continent in the S. Hemisphere which served as the birthplace of the higher plants--but this is a wretchedly poor conjecture.

It is odd that Ball does not allude to the obvious fact that there must have been alpine plants before the Glacial period, many of which would have returned to the mountains after the Glacial period, when the climate again became warm.

I always accounted to myself in this manner for the gentians, etc. Ball ought also to have considered the alpine insects common to the Arctic regions.

I do not know how it may be with you, but my faith in the glacial migration is not at all shaken. Ball argues page 18 that "during ancient Palaeozoic times, before the deposition of the Coal-measures, the atmosphere contained twenty times as much carbonic acid gas and considerably less oxygen than it does at present.

Darwin understands him to mean that the Vascular Cryptogams and Gymnosperms could stand the sea-level atmosphere, whereas the Angiosperms would only be able to exist in the higher regions where the percentage of CO 2 was small.

It is not clear to us that Ball relies so largely on the condition of the atmosphere as regards CO 2. If he does he is clearly in error, for everything we know of assimilation points to the conclusion that per 10, 1 per cent.

Mountain plants would be more likely to descend to the plains to share in the rich feast than ascend to higher regions to avoid it. Ball draws attention to the imperfection of our plant records as regards the floras of mountain regions.

It is, he thinks, conceivable that there existed a vegetation on the Carboniferous mountains of which no traces have been preserved in the rocks.

Since the first part of this note was written, a paper has been read May 29th, by Dr. The general results were practically identical in the two sets of experiments.

But there seems to be a disturbance in metabolism, and the plants fail to take advantage of the increased supply of CO 2.

It is hoped that Dr. Horace Brown and Mr. Escombe will extend their experiments to Vascular Cryptogams, and thus obtain evidence bearing more directly upon the question of an increased amount of CO 2 in the atmosphere of the Coal-period forests.

The quote seems accurate as far as it goes, but it is hardly damning to the theory of evolution that Darwin did not indeed, could not, given the evidence known in his time have a theory that described the evolution of plants.

It was written in after all. Of course, the quote miners want people to make a conclusion from this that is nothing more than an appeal to Darwin's ignorance.

It is also extremely out-of-date. Of course the creationist quote omits potential solutions. But as quotes go, I will not call this creationist quote dishonest.

Google shows mainstream science sites using the quote as well, like Origin of the Angiosperms. The basic premise is no longer valid: There is a long fossil history of plants in which they become less and less modern in aspect the further back one looks.

This letter is simply part of that debate - one in which Darwin admits to not knowing one particular answer. But this should not be taken to imply that there are good reasons to believe that it could not have started on the earth by a perfectly reasonable sequence of fairly ordinary chemical reactions.

The plain fact is that the time available was too long, the many microenvironments on the earth's surface too diverse, the various chemical possibilities too numerous and our own knowledge and imagination too feeble to allow us to be able to unravel exactly how it might or might not have happened such a long time ago, especially as we have no experimental evidence from that era to check our ideas against.

Crick's book is about his proposition that life on Earth may have been the result of "directed panspermia. In this quote, Crick is simply pointing out how, in the absence of evidence, the appearance of life on Earth might seem like a miracle.

But he specifically admits that abiogenesis may have occurred on Earth as a result of ordinary chemical processes that require no resort to outside intelligence.

Leaving out that part of it, by cutting off what immediately follows, is deeply dishonest. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links?

Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.

As this specifies the 6th edition, I've made use of the edition that's on line at Online Literature Library since the Talk. Origins archive has the 1st edition.

Darwin's writing style was to ask a rhetorical question and then give an answer, as we see below:. But just in proportion as this process of extermination has acted on an enormous scale, so must the number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed, be truly enormous.

Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against my theory.

The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record. In the first place, it should always be borne in mind what sort of intermediate forms must, on the theory, have formerly existed.

But this is a wholly false view; we should always look for forms intermediate between each species and a common but unknown progenitor; and the progenitor will generally have differed in some respects from all its modified descendants.

To give a simple illustration: These two breeds, moreover, have become so much modified, that, if we had no historical or indirect evidence regarding their origin, it would not have been possible to have determined from a mere comparison of their structure with that of the rock-pigeon, C.

So with natural species, if we look to forms very distinct, for instance to the horse and tapir, we have no reason to suppose that links directly intermediate between them ever existed, but between each and an unknown common parent.

The common parent will have had in its whole organisation much general resemblance to the tapir and to the horse; but in some points of structure may have differed considerably from both, even perhaps more than they differ from each other.

Hence, in all such cases, we should be unable to recognise the parent-form of any two or more species, even if we closely compared the structure of the parent with that of its modified descendants, unless at the same time we had a nearly perfect chain of the intermediate links.

The Quote Miner only quotes the question, not the answer that follows, in which Darwin states his belief that the geological record is incomplete, and then outlines which transitional forms he would expect to find if they're found at all.

I looked at volume 2 of Life and Letters , but cannot find anything remotely similar to that quote in the pages in that vicinity. Here the letter is, in its entirety, from pages another example of much-copied errors in hand-me-down quote-mining , at: The Writings of Charles Darwin on the Web: Life and Letters of Charles Darwin: You seemed to have worked admirably on the species question; there could not have been a better plan than reading up on the opposite side.

I honour you most sincerely. To have maintained in the position of a master, one [Page 25] side of a question for thirty years, and then deliberately give it up, is a fact to which I much doubt whether the records of science offer a parallel.

For myself, also, I rejoice profoundly; for, thinking of so many cases of men pursuing an illusion for years, often and often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may not have devoted my life to a phantasy.

Now I look at it as morally impossible that investigators of truth, like you and Hooker, can be wholly wrong, and therefore I rest in peace.

Thank you for criticisms, which, if there be a second edition, I will attend to. I have been thinking that if I am much execrated as an atheist, etc.

I cannot help thinking that you overrate the importance of the multiple origin of dogs. The only difference is, that in the case of single origins, all difference of the races has originated since man domesticated the species.

In the case of multiple origins part of the difference was produced under natural conditions. I should infinitely prefer the theory of single origin in all cases, if facts would permit its reception.

Besides this, the close resemblance of at least three kinds of American domestic dogs to wild species still inhabiting the countries where they are now domesticated, seem to almost compel admission that more than one wild Canis has been domesticated by man.

Herschel, to whom I sent a copy, is going to read my book. He says he leans to the side opposed to me.

If you should meet him after he has read me, pray find out what he thinks, for, of course, he will not write; and I should excessively like to hear whether I produce any effect on such a mind.

He was, however, at work on the 'Antiquity of Man' in , and had already determined to discuss the 'Origin' at the end of the book. So, once again we see Darwin's modesty and Victorian style being used by a crasser age to make it look as if Darwin harbored real doubts about his theory when, in fact, he held it would be "morally impossible" for it to be wrong, especially since it had passed the test of convincing such men as Lyell and Hooker.

This is the worst of the misquotes uncovered by this project in my humble opinion. Keith Davies being the guy who quoted some astronomers having saying there was a mystery and clipped the end of the sentence that said "is also solved.

I notice the creationist quote it as a word as "fantasy" and the letter quoted has "phantasy. Lets see what Google gives when we use "phantasy" spelling is used:.

Charles Darwin characterized his idea as a "rag of an hypothesis with as many flaws and holes as sound parts. Ten days before the proofs were bound he wrote to his friend J.

Darwin passed the rest of his life in a semi - invalid condition, the exact cause of which, whether organic or psychological is not well known. He had reservations and doubts about his theory and in his writings there are lines of defence, in case it was proved as erroneous.

I am ready to cry in despair at my blindness and my presumption" From ape to man page 23 Wendt, Herbert NY The phrase "with vexation" replaces "in despair" and there are other differences with the previous version of the misquote.

I am ready to cry with vexation at my blindness and presumption" Charles Darwin [12]. During that whole time he had rarely been able to write free of stomach pains for more than twenty minutes at a stretch.

The next day, in torrential rain, he took himself off to Ilkley. The howling wind was as nothing to the storm of self-doubt, his nagging, gnawing fear that 'I have devoted my life to a fantasy' and a dangerous one But it is at fault in giving the impression - particularly in that passage - that Darwin's doubts about evolution was the cause for his ailments and troubles.

They present Darwin as betraying his class allegiances in taking a radical stance over evolution, which had been previously a view of social radicals and revolutionaries.

I think, and so do many others, that this is bunk. So far as I can tell, he never doubted the truth or value of the evolutionary hypothesis once he had come up with it in October In the fifth place, even the father of evolution, Charles Darwin, had serious doubts about his own theory.

Shortly after Darwin published his infamous book on the origin of species, he wrote in a letter to Charles Lyell: He did not even believe it himself!

This is the worst of all. Darwin did not believe his theory himself!?! In any event, notice the claim that the vexation quote comes from the same letter which is false.

The context for the second statement can be found in The writings of Charles Darwin on the web: The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin: I write now to supplicate most earnestly a favour, viz.

Topographie von Regensburg, If you have not them, will you send one line by return of post: I have been making some calculations about varieties, etc.

I am the most miserable, bemuddled, stupid dog in all England, and am ready to cry with vexation at my blindness and presumption.

Another flagrant out-of-context quote. Maybe it is not in this list but since it so commonly associated with the quote-miner's list, it might be a good idea add it to the compilation.

This book is out of print, the latest versions printed in The original was printed in ! Needless to say there have been quite a few discoveries regarding the origin of fish since The version must have been a reprint also, as Norman died of endocarditis in Any statements about the geological record before would now be very much out of date.

Problems in Evolution , Dover Publications, Inc. This is a Dover paperback reprint of a text book. It's not longer available through Dover Publications.

Stahl is a profession of biology at St. She is quoted in quite a few creationist quote mines. Her book is apparently a favorite of Phil Johnson, and the quote above is most probably cribbed from Johnson's "Darwin on Trial".

Interestingly enough, nearly all quote mines cite the Dover reprint, rather than the original printing by McGraw Hill. Most of them lived after the first amphibians appeared, and those that came before showed no evidence of developing the stout limbs and ribs that characterize the primitive tetrapods.

While paleontologists hope to find remains of the rhipidistian line in which these structures evolved, they have no intention of neglecting the history of the other members of the group.

The amphibians were not the last survivors of a lesser class but one of a number of new forms produced as the early bony fishes diversified rapidly in the Devonian period.

At their first appearance, they gave the impression less of a revolutionary new group than of fishes peculiarly adapted for special habits of life.

Outwardly, except for their legs, they resembled the rhipidistian fishes from which they sprang. Very likely, they continued to swim in the shallows, as their sharp-toothed forebears had, preying on the abundant placoderms and early paleoniscooids to be found there.

Paleontologists are quite certain of the relationship between the rhipidistians and the amphibians even though they have not discovered the animals intermediate between the finned and limbed forms.

The remains of the oldest tetrapods in their collections leave no doubt about the derivation of the axial skeleton from fishes of the rhipidistian group.

He was a physicist though a Nobel Prize winner , but not a biologist or otherwise an expert in evolution. I have previously looked up this quote and the results are archived in D.

We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation which is unthinkable. The quote that is attributed to Sir Arthur Keith is a figment of the creationists imagination.

I researched that quote a month or two ago and could not find a trace of it. No library in the Atlanta metro area has this particular edition and neither Amazon nor Barnes and Noble has this edition.

I am in nine newsgroups and no one in these NGs had a copy or had ever seen one. A search of the internet showed many references for this quote but every one of them was from a creationist site.

It is also amazing because that Sir Arthur died in and the th anniversary edition would not have been issued until Tell me, did "God" write this for Sir Arthur from heaven?

However, Sir Arthur Keith did indeed write an introduction to the Origin of Species Keith, , although he did so over 30 years before any centennial edition would have been printed.

And considering that Keith died in , he wouldn't have been in a position to write one had he wanted to. Did Keith write another introduction later in his life?

This is doubtful as well, since the author of a later introduction to the Origin , W. Thompson, states right at the beginning of his own effort:.

When I was asked by the publishers of this new edition of The Origin of Species to write an introduction replacing the one prepared a quarter of a century ago by the distinguished Darwinian, Sir Arthur Keith, I felt extremely hesitant to accept the invitation.

Does the supposedly quoted material reflect Keith's views? Describing Darwin's arrival at the Galapagos Islands, Keith writes:. And why should each of the islands have its own peculiar creations?

Special creation could not explain such things. We see that Keith doesn't believe that that special creation is an alternative at all, since he doesn't feel that it can explain the fauna of the Galapagos.

And later on he writes:. The Origin of Species is still the book which contains the most complete demonstration that the law of evolution is true.

It's obvious that Keith believes in evolution not because he doesn't like the alternatives, but because he believes evolution to be true.

Introduction to "The origin of species by means of natural selection", by Charles Darwin. Introduction to "The origin of species", by Charles Darwin.

His son edited, after his father's death, a book called The life and letters of Charles Darwin. In which you can track down the second half of the "quote" above, but without any trace of the first half.

I tracked this down and reported what I found in Re: He who rejects these views on the nature of the geological record, will rightly reject my whole theory.

For he may ask in vain where are the numberless transitional missing links which must formerly have connected the closely allied or representative.

I'll use the copy of Origin that's in the Talk. This is from the near the end of chapter 10 of the 1st edition funny how no edition number is given with the quote.

All these causes taken conjointly, must have tended to make the geological record extremely imperfect, and will to a large extent explain why we do not find interminable varieties, connecting together all the extinct and existing forms of life by the finest graduated steps.

For he may ask in vain where are the numberless transitional links which must formerly have connected the closely allied or representative species, found in the several stages of the same great formation.

He may disbelieve in the enormous intervals of time which have elapsed between our consecutive formations; he may overlook how important a part migration must have played, when the formations of any one great region alone, as that of Europe, are considered; he may urge the apparent, but often falsely apparent, sudden coming in of whole groups of species.

He may ask where are the remains of those infinitely numerous organisms which must have existed long before the first bed of the Silurian system was deposited:

Bleibt Kovac oder kommt es zur Entlassung? Der Fantasie sind keine Grenzen gesetzt und sobald der Anpfiff näher rückt, werden sich die Buchmacher ein noch umfassenderes Wettprogramm überlegt haben. Aber sehen wir uns hier einfach das Quoten Angebot von bet an:. Diese Website benutzt Cookies. Die besten vier Gruppendritten steigen ebenfalls auf. Heinz ist seit mehr als Beste Spielothek in Obernstein finden Jahren im Geschäft mit Sportwetten tätig. Das genaue Gegenteil der ersten Wette liefert ebenfalls Unibet. Gegen Deutschland schieden casino in furth im wald Franzosen im Viertelfinale jedoch aus. Ob es aber tatsächlich für den dritten EM-Titel in Serie reichen wird, muss sich erst weisen. Hier wurde nur google spiele kostenlos ersten Ableger des Turniers und beim vierten Ableger — bei letzterem gab es auch kein Finale — auf die Austragung des Spiels um Platz drei verzichtet. Wer holt den Book of ra deluxe free games Obwohl Deutschland über weite Strecken das Spiel beherrschte nützen die Franzosen zwei Fehler eiskalt aus und gewinnen mit 2: Auch der dänische Titelgewinn vor 24 Jahren war eine Sensation. Bleibt Kovac casino royale 7 neiva kommt es zur Entlassung? Viel wird vom mannschaftlichen Zusammenhalt abhängen. Erstmals sind bei einer Europameisterschaft 24 anstatt wie bisher 16 Mannschaften dabei. Stattdessen wird diesmal in Lille und in Nizza gespielt. Nach der Gruppenphase wird im K. Das gilt auch für unsere nächste verrückte Wettquote zur Europameisterschaft, die sich ebenfalls bei Mybet findet. This is the worst of all. The only difference is, that in the case of single origins, all difference of the races has originated since man domesticated the species. At the spiele spielen kostenlos ohne anmeldung of the paper on page we find this: With every event one can associate a probability - the chance that Beste Spielothek in Einhaus finden will occur. This is from roughly halfway through chapter 6 of the 1st edition:. Another flagrant out-of-context quote. Quadrangle Books,at 95, 97 from Bird, I, p. For one thing, the time with which our problem is concerned is geological time, and the whole extent of human history is trivial in the balance. Facades are more than the faces of buildings. We hope you enjoy this collection of quotes about facades. The context for the second statement can be found in The Beste Spielothek in Luhme finden of Charles Darwin on the web: I judge this one to be in context.

0 thoughts on “Quote em

Hinterlasse eine Antwort

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind markiert *