Thursday, October 20, 2005

A Word On Evolution

Evolution, simply stated, is the theory that species develop over time by adapting to their environments. There is no dispute that humans are taller today than they were 500 years ago. Life span is considerably longer than it once was, although if you believe the Biblical stories that Noah lived to be 950 years old, we have devolved as a species.

Natural selection is a mechanism of evolution. In other words, species improve and evolve over time by killing off the weaker members before they can reproduce. The logic is that when the strong produce, the species as a whole improves its chances of survival. Christian slave owners were guided by this belief when they bred slaves, as are modern day dog and horse breeders. On a more humorous note, the Darwin Awards are satirical awards given to people who do incredibly stupid things and sometimes die doing so.

For whatever reason, even though they acknowledge the principles of evolution in many aspects, the religious people of America have set their sights on evolution as a heretical belief to be eradicated from the public school curriculum. The rhetoric is broad, but their conclusions are quite uniform -- evolution is incompatible with religion.

Hearing this argument repeated time and again inspired me to return to the Bible to understand the argument. I now return from my journey and I remain perplexed.

The story goes that God created two human beings, Adam and Eve. They begat, and their progeny begat and everyone else begatted for hundreds of years (early humanity was one big orgy), until the earth had lots of people. Then God had second thoughts. The descendants of Adam and Eve were proving to be quite evil and disobedient so God decided to put the smack down. Repent or die.

Noah, one of the begatees, was a good child of the Lord. "Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God." (Genesis 6:9). Because Noah was part of the Republican party, God gave him the heads-up about Hurricane Katrina. "Psssst... Noah, over here. I'm going to break those levees and flood the whole place with everyone in it. No, FEMA, is not going in there. You want in or what?" Noah got the point. So, God told Noah to make an ark out of gopher wood and told Noah "But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee." (Genesis 6:18). "And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the flood. Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah. (Genesis 7:7-9). Every other living creature on earth was destroyed. "And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark." (Genesis 7:23).

Every human being alive today, according to Genesis, is a descendant of Noah or one of his three sons (Shem, Ham & Japheth).

Given that the earth currently is populated by almost 6.5 Billion people, that is an exceptional amount of begatting on the part of Noah and his sons. Good job guys!

But the question remains. The 6.5 Billion people on earth look really different. How is it that a tall, blond Scandinavian descends from the same ancestor that a dark-skinned Nigerian claims as a forefather? How about the Chinese? Arabs? Why is it that Asians aren't particularly hairy people and Arabs have enough excess hair to donate to all the balding men of the world? Adaptation to the environment and natural selection makes sense as an answer. Indigenous people from the southern hemisphere tend to be darker-skinned (increased melanin to deal with sun exposure) versus the pale-skinned folks of the northern hemisphere (who have significantly less time in the sun).

The Bible says that Noah, his sons and their wives are the only people who came off the ark and God gave them the covenant to re-start humankind. What other way, besides evolution, did we go from one family to a multitude of races? It certainly wasn't intelligent design.

35 Comments:

At 9:20 PM, October 20, 2005 , Blogger Stalin the Shark said...

Insurgent,

Clearly, you are destined to roast slowly in Satan's barbecue pit for your insolent questioning.

Having continued my reading on the subject - Wikipedia has a good article - I do have to tip my hat to the wingers, because they're going about this a bit more cleverly than with the creationism thing.

I've found that what dumbfounds them is the question of experimental proof, because even the dullest wingnut somehow grasps that science involves experiments, and if that fails, to ask whether Eve was created from a mudcake or from Adam's rib; there are two stories of the creation of woman, not one.

Hard to believe that one has to deal with this kind of rank stupidity coming from the same people who still believe Saddam had WMDs, isn't it?

:-), StS

 
At 10:11 PM, October 20, 2005 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

STS -

You are so right. They demand absolute precision of evidence when it comes to evolution, but make 1,000 excuses for the nonsense from their reich wing leaders. If only they applied that strict constructionism to the hollow excuses for the Iraq war, they might have some credibility.

 
At 7:48 AM, October 21, 2005 , Blogger Capt. Fogg said...

The fact is that the guy who wrote the two seperate and mutually contradictory flood stories that are interleaved in Genesis, had no idea there was a great civilization in China, no idea of the new world, or Australia. His readers couldn't ask why or how the kangaroos got to Australia from ararat.

What our excuse is, I can't imagine.

 
At 5:52 PM, October 21, 2005 , Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

sts, ii,

As I responded in my comments on a similar post, the two accounts are not hard to explain at all, and yes it is easy to understand that science needs experimental proof, (of which they have yet to make a man out of a monkey :) , but evolution requres both faith and science while religion only requires faith. We never claim that Religion is Science. That is a Red Herring and puts words in peoples mouths.

BTW ii, I found it funny and enjoyed it. :)

Will be back later to rebut with some of my usual sound logic. :)

I too hope to meet you if I am ever in L.A. I think you have a really great mind and a good grasp of things, (except where we disagree...insert sarcasm/humor here.) :)



FAR.


FAR.

 
At 6:49 PM, October 21, 2005 , Blogger Stalin the Shark said...

FAR, as I've noted previously, you do seem quite pleasant, but your logic really defies me.

We share 98% of our DNA with apes, some of us, like Bill O'Reilly, perhaps a bit more than that. A paternity test will produce a positive result with less evidence.

Meanwhile, there is no reconciling the gaping holes in Genesis with each other. I'd argue that the bible has significantly more holes than does darwin; but of course, that's not going to affect your opinions.

:-), StS

 
At 7:51 AM, October 22, 2005 , Blogger jj said...

II-great post. I laughed I cried I wished I was in on all that begatin.

Anyway what are you going to say next the earth is more than 6000 years old that the stars and galaxies where formed before the earth and our star or that the earth is not the center of the universe and solar system. Please.

If we are all related some of us may be geneticaly uhm messed up in a deliverance sort of way. Maybe the literal Bible crowd are all in the family. I kid.;)

 
At 9:54 PM, October 23, 2005 , Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

10 23 05

Hello II:
Great article! I oft wonder how fundamentalist Christians explain the fossil record? I don't mean to insult their religion, but just because someone is a Christian doesn't mean that they must have a literal interpretation of the bible. See the Epic of Gilgamesh, ya dig?! As an aspiring physicist, I always view the symmetry and the order in the universe as being divinely inspired. But I can acknowledge that evolution could have been such a mechanism. What bothers me is the arrogance with which some interpret the will of God. If God is infinite in capability, who is to say that he or it didn't use evolution as a tool? The universe has evolved in many different ways; you all know the compelling justification for a big bang has to do with the background radiation 2.7K Whoa!!!! Makes your head spin! But ultimately, I believe that the Universe just is, which is awfully close to something in the Bible when God said:"I am that I am." Order can be seen in chaotic systems (believe it or not), solid state structures, particle physics (see CPT symmetry) etc, my point is that there is so much order and some of it wasn't random! Great post II!

 
At 9:56 PM, October 23, 2005 , Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

10 23 05

II and for that reason, along with some spiritual experiences that I have had, I still believe in God :)

 
At 3:03 PM, October 25, 2005 , Blogger phinky said...

So where is the peer review of creationism? I could see it now, the Japanese scientists dispute the Jewish/Christian/Muslim creation story because we all know that humans were created by the goddess Amertaratsu.

 
At 6:36 PM, October 25, 2005 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

Phinky,

Stalin, the most whitty Shark on the planet, made the same point on another blog. He provided the link to the site of those who believe that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created humanity and, thus, the FSM believers request that their theory be taught in schools. http://www.venganza.org/

 
At 8:21 PM, October 25, 2005 , Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

sts,

said: "I've found that what dumbfounds them is the question of experimental proof, because even the dullest wingnut somehow grasps that science involves experiments,"

- Nope, it only dumbfounds those who discard Science. To those who have gone on to higher education we agree that Science needs experiments

We also know that Religious truth should never disagree with Scientific truth, but experiments must be repeatable.

Which is more reliable…a “truth” that is thousands of years old and unchanging or a “truth” that is modern and ever changing?

Even the dullest Evolution wingnut knows much of what is in the Theory is not repeatable.

Religion is faith.
Evolution is Scientific Theory that requires quite a bit of faith.

The Book "Icons of Evolution" shows even the Scientists who only use science to examine Evolution are showing the facts that refute all of the 10 Icons of Evolution:
1. The Miller-Urey Experiment
2. Darwin's Tree of Life
3. Homology
4. Haekel's Embryos
5. Archaeopteryx
6. The Peppered Moths
7. Darwin's Finches
8. Four winged Fruit Flies
9. Fossil horses and their evolution
10. Ape to Man (the famous ascendancy drawing)


Also those with a solid knowledge of the Bible are always smiling about any discussion of the Bible because all of the “supposed” inconsistencies are all easily explained when context is applied and the mind is open.

sts said: "ask whether Eve was created from a mudcake or from Adam's rib; there are two stories of the creation of woman, not one."

Easy to explain if one has an open mind and is not predisposed to ignore logic because of mental bias blockage. If one says “He rode a horse to town” and in another statement says “He rode an animal to town”, the statements are not contradictory at all, just two ways to say he went to town.

Since we are all made from elements, and "dust" or "mudcake" , (as you mockingly call it), is comprised of elements, then both of these metaphors can be true because if Adams rib was used as a pattern for Eve's DNA, then it too would be talking about elements used in the “creation” of Eve. (If you have already invented an apple, why reinvent it again if all you need is the seed?) We get DNA from bones all of the time these days, but of course God would need to be further advanced than we are today, especially if perhaps he used in vitro or some other more advanced technique to create Adam and Eve. Only a closed mind would say that this is not a possibility.

All gaps in the Bible can be explained to anyone that has an open mind, but those who have their minds made up are by definition not open to new ideas.

In the end though one must ponder with an open and curious mind and God will make it known to them...

Here are two promises in the Bible that tells you basically that if you really want to know and your mind is open to receive new information, God will inform you.

"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him." (James 1:5)

"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:" (Matt 7:7)

If I am wrong, no harm done. The teachings of the Bible have inspired me to try to be a better person than I might otherwise be, I am sure that if I didn’t have a belief that in the hereafter I might get the consequences of all of the bad deeds I deserve, I probably would be in the mold of…”Eat drink and be merry and don’t worry about anyone but me”, but if you are wrong……..…….???


FAR.

 
At 9:27 PM, October 25, 2005 , Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

Oops,

In re-reading my post, I should have said "mammal" instead of "Animal" since a horse is a mammal.

:)


FAR.

 
At 9:33 PM, October 25, 2005 , Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

sts,

If you die and DNA testing is done on your badly decomposed body, would they make a mistake and say that you were not human, but an Ape?

What if only a small bone was found so they could not make assumptions based upon physical size?

FAR.

 
At 10:08 AM, October 26, 2005 , Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

sts,

said: "We share 98% of our DNA with apes.."

Yes, but Apes have 10% more DNA than we do, and 80% of the protien genomes are different between Apes and humans, which makes us quite different DNA wise.

Also, Our DNA is about 75% similar to that of a nematode, which is basically a small soil-dwelling worm, and no one is claiming we came from worms.


FAR.

 
At 11:59 AM, October 26, 2005 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

FAR -

Does the fact that we share such a high percentage of DNA with apes lend credence to the "theory" of evolution. The theory may be incomplete, but doesn't that evidence make it worthy of further study? Asking "why" or "how" humans share DNA with apes or worms is an appropriate topic for science. Why would that be contrary to religion?

 
At 1:51 AM, October 27, 2005 , Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

ii,

The problem Religion has with Evolution is the idea that we are not unique to the animal kingdom.

Human life is so much more important than Animal Life, and Evolution has a way of down playing that fact.

Here is the pecking order:

1. God
2. Angels
3. Man
4. Animals/Mammals/Birds
5. Insects ?
6. All other Living things

All life is important, but Humans have a unique place in the pecking order.

Ever wonder why we call God our "Father in Heaven?"

What if Adam and Eve had belly buttons?

When Jesus was asked what does God look like he said (depending upon your intrepretation) one of two things:
a.) He looks just like me.
b.) He is God.

"Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?" (John 14:9 )

God made us in his Image and what if he made our, (life Force), Spirits in his image also?

"Let the LORD, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation" (Num 27:16)

Ever seen the movie "Ghost" with Demi Moore and Patrick Swayze? What if that is a good idea of what our Spirits look like, i.e., just like our physical self? How would that square with Evolution?

In other words our DNA is unique and it is a reflection of what our Spirit looks like when we are born. How would one square that with Evolution.

Spirit goes into the body, life begins....Spirit leaves the body, life ends.

"And he gave up the Ghost, (Spirit), and died", is in the Bible Eleven times.

See the conflicts?

I believe that God uses some of Evolution, like natural selection, but not organic evolution, just not possible.

And as far as having similar DNA to lots of other living creatures, well just that, they are also living creatures, but we have enough differences to make us Human, and them Animals/Mammals/Birds, etc.

Everything is made from elements/matter. Everything has a common link to everything else.

But there is a pecking order of importance.

FAR.

 
At 9:12 AM, October 27, 2005 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

It's not a matter of reducing that importance. Our frontal lobes and opposing thumbs will always separate us from the rest of the animal kingdom. But, there is still a scientific question of why there is so much similarily in DNA and I can't figure out why there is a religious objection to using science to answer that question.

Religion also went after Galilleo when he suggested that the world wasn't flat. Religious fundamentalists don't have a good track record on scientific advancement.

 
At 12:16 PM, October 27, 2005 , Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

I think the objection also hinges on the idea that Science has the capability to determine how life started, while most Religious people feel that it is am inpossible task without making assumptions that require faith. Sure there will be some circumstantial evidence, but nothing conclusive will be found because all of the needed evidence that most likely can be found would be only a small amount and that requires too much interpolation to fill in the gaps.



FAR.

 
At 12:48 PM, October 27, 2005 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

FAR -

Doesn't all science require a certain amount of faith? The notion of gravity, the breadth of the solar system, the big bang theory?

How do you know science can't answer the question of how life started unless the effort is made?

 
At 3:36 PM, October 27, 2005 , Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

ii,

I have no problem with Science trying to answer the questions of the past.

Where I personally have the problem is in the attitude of those who support Evolution fighting so hard against anyone who dares to challenge their findings. It's almost like they are treating those who want to present "any" opposition as heresy by the Olympian Intellectuals of the Temple of Evolution.


FAR.

 
At 4:10 PM, October 27, 2005 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

I have no idea what other evolution supporters say or do, but speaking for myself, I find it troubling that religious people want to offer religion in science class. ID is not science. Period.

I don't think it's objectionable to teach religion in school. Why not teach a class on world religions to kids at some point? But, just like you said before, religion requires faith and faith is not subject to scientific verification.

 
At 7:23 PM, October 27, 2005 , Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

ii,

We agree on the basic premise here.
I don't think ID should be taught in Science Class either.

What I want to see is a disclaimer in Science class that "Many people believe the Theory of Evolution is not very well supported by Science."

I want that statement so that those young impressionable minds don't get the false impression that "everyone" believes that Evolution is the only answer.

I also think that for every school that teaches Evolution they should also be required to teach Philosophy Class with the ID Theory that is supported by many religious folks presented as an alternative to the "Scientific" theory that is opposed by a majority of religious people and is enthusiastically supported by Atheists. (With many various poll numbers to show the actual support for each.)



FAR.

 
At 7:28 PM, October 27, 2005 , Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

ii,

I think if we lived in England and had the "Church of England" as the National Religion, most secular people would want the same "disclaimer" that I am asking for on the flip side.

We religious people are having a problem with the "Church of Evolution" being taught as the National Scientific Thought (Religion) on the origin of the species, and religious folks are on the outside looking in.


FAR.

 
At 10:58 AM, October 31, 2005 , Blogger Reign of Reason said...

FAR: Regarding you comments about evolution/creationism and the bible…

Regarding the ‘divine inspiration of the bible’ -- What about all the specific instructions on how to deal with your slaves? The bible is very specific:

Exodus 21:7-11 -- how/when to sell your daughter into sexual slavery...

Exodus 21:20-21 -- how to beat them...

etc.

You're efforts at explaining simply bible controversy are do not address the real issues with these (mostly) 3000 year old fables constructed by a bunch of bronze age tribesmen from the middle east (the old testament).

Please do not throw in with the lot that are trying to get any aspect of this obviously evil book read by our children. I don't want mine reading it.

 
At 11:52 AM, October 31, 2005 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

FAR -

Why is such a disclaimer necessary? There are many theories that people believe are not very well supported by science, like big bang.
Isn't that the point of science class -- to test theories and come to your own conclusions?

Also, that is a slippery slope. If we have to qualify scientific theories based upon objections from an abstract group of "people" (whoever they may be), where does it stop? Who are those people and why do their objections dictate what is and is not taught in schools?

If you are religious, presumably you are teaching your children about creationism and having the evolution discussion when they come home from biology class. Why should the government impose your religious views on our science classes? Children have impressionable minds, but that's where parenting comes in - not disclaimers on science books.

 
At 9:14 AM, November 05, 2005 , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Advertising can be a big problem otherwise. A lot of companies reserve a big chunk of their budgets to cover marketing expenditures.

 
At 9:48 PM, December 05, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

polo ralph lauren, prada outlet, oakley vault, christian louboutin shoes, cheap oakley sunglasses, tory burch outlet online, true religion, michael kors outlet, coach outlet, prada handbags, michael kors outlet online, chanel handbags, louis vuitton outlet, tiffany jewelry, gucci handbags, burberry outlet online, kate spade outlet, michael kors outlet online, coach outlet store online, michael kors handbags, oakley sunglasses, louis vuitton outlet online, tiffany and co jewelry, longchamp outlet online, ray ban sunglasses, michael kors outlet store, louis vuitton, nike air max, longchamp outlet, red bottom shoes, true religion outlet, polo ralph lauren outlet, jordan shoes, michael kors outlet online, nike outlet, ray ban outlet, christian louboutin, nike free, nike air max, burberry outlet online, kate spade outlet online, louis vuitton outlet, coach outlet, longchamp handbags, louis vuitton handbags, coach purses, christian louboutin outlet

 
At 9:51 PM, December 05, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

converse pas cher, nike roshe run, hermes pas cher, nike roshe, true religion outlet, ray ban pas cher, north face, nike air force, guess pas cher, mulberry, scarpe hogan, hollister, true religion jeans, ralph lauren pas cher, ralph lauren, sac michael kors, burberry pas cher, hollister, louis vuitton pas cher, michael kors uk, oakley pas cher, air max pas cher, nike free, michael kors canada, louis vuitton, nike air max, sac vanessa bruno, nike air max, chaussure louboutin, north face pas cher, vans pas cher, air jordan, nike blazer pas cher, longchamp pas cher, sac louis vuitton, louis vuitton uk, lululemon, tn pas cher, longchamp, air max, ray ban uk, lacoste pas cher, abercrombie and fitch, timberland, new balance pas cher, barbour, nike free pas cher

 
At 9:57 PM, December 05, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

babyliss, new balance outlet, replica watches, vans outlet, mcm handbags, celine handbags, beats headphones, nike trainers, nfl jerseys, giuseppe zanotti, jimmy choo shoes, ugg boots, birkin bag, asics shoes, canada goose outlet, ferragamo shoes, insanity workout, nike huarache, chi flat iron, hollister, abercrombie and fitch, uggs outlet, north face jackets, north face jackets, mac cosmetics, soccer jerseys, canada goose outlet, uggs outlet, uggs on sale, bottega veneta, instyler ionic styler, ugg boots clearance, nike roshe, valentino shoes, lululemon outlet, ugg, marc jacobs outlet, ugg outlet, longchamp, ghd, reebok shoes, ugg soldes, p90x workout, soccer shoes, wedding dresses, mont blanc pens, herve leger, canada goose outlet, canada goose

 
At 10:04 PM, December 05, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

ugg, gucci, canada goose, iphone 6 case, hollister canada, vans, canada goose, swarovski uk, pandora jewelry, air max, ray ban, pandora charms, moncler, timberland shoes, moncler outlet, moncler, canada goose, replica watches, louis vuitton canada, uggs canada, coach outlet, juicy couture outlet, converse shoes, thomas sabo uk, nike air max, juicy couture outlet, ralph lauren, hollister clothing, moncler, hollister, supra shoes, louboutin, toms outlet, oakley, canada goose pas cher, parajumpers outlet, moncler, wedding dress, baseball bats, converse, swarovski jewelry, links of london uk, lancel, moncler outlet, pandora uk, karen millen, moncler, montre femme

 
At 6:53 PM, September 23, 2015 , Blogger ninest123 Ninest said...

ninest123 09.24
oakley sunglasses, tiffany jewelry, tory burch outlet, ray ban sunglasses, ray ban sunglasses, louboutin shoes, michael kors outlet, oakley sunglasses, burberry outlet online, michael kors outlet, replica watches, louis vuitton, louis vuitton outlet, uggs on sale, oakley sunglasses, longchamp outlet, michael kors outlet, burberry, polo ralph lauren outlet, replica watches, michael kors outlet, christian louboutin outlet, oakley sunglasses, nike air max, gucci outlet, louis vuitton, michael kors outlet, ugg boots, tiffany and co, cheap oakley sunglasses, longchamp, longchamp outlet, prada outlet, ray ban sunglasses, louboutin outlet, prada handbags, ugg boots, nike air max, ugg boots, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton, louis vuitton outlet, ugg boots, nike outlet, michael kors, jordan shoes, louboutin

 
At 6:55 PM, September 23, 2015 , Blogger ninest123 Ninest said...

burberry, new balance pas cher, michael kors, coach outlet, sac longchamp, true religion jeans, mulberry, oakley pas cher, ralph lauren pas cher, louboutin pas cher, ralph lauren uk, nike free run uk, north face, true religion jeans, michael kors, ray ban pas cher, true religion jeans, sac guess, nike air max, air jordan pas cher, vans pas cher, nike air max, nike free, tn pas cher, coach factory outlet, air max, coach purses, nike roshe run, chanel handbags, coach outlet, hollister pas cher, converse pas cher, abercrombie and fitch, north face, true religion outlet, nike blazer, hogan, kate spade outlet, hermes, longchamp pas cher, lululemon, nike air max, timberland, nike free, hollister, michael kors, michael kors, kate spade handbags, air force, ray ban uk, lacoste pas cher

 
At 6:59 PM, September 23, 2015 , Blogger ninest123 Ninest said...

instyler, nike air max, oakley, ferragamo shoes, herve leger, jimmy choo shoes, nike huarache, giuseppe zanotti, celine handbags, mcm handbags, hollister, north face outlet, ray ban, beats by dre, hollister, converse outlet, vans shoes, nike roshe, hollister, soccer shoes, lancel, ralph lauren, louboutin, insanity workout, valentino shoes, new balance, wedding dresses, mont blanc, abercrombie and fitch, asics running shoes, reebok shoes, chi flat iron, longchamp, nike air max, nike trainers, north face outlet, converse, p90x workout, soccer jerseys, vans, timberland boots, mac cosmetics, lululemon, ghd, baseball bats, nfl jerseys, birkin bag, nike roshe, gucci, babyliss, iphone 6 cases, bottega veneta, vanessa bruno

 
At 7:01 PM, September 23, 2015 , Blogger ninest123 Ninest said...

pandora jewelry, marc jacobs, moncler outlet, coach outlet, canada goose, replica watches, bottes ugg, michael kors outlet online, canada goose, pandora charms, wedding dresses, ugg boots uk, doudoune canada goose, canada goose outlet, moncler, karen millen, louis vuitton, moncler, links of london, pandora jewelry, moncler, michael kors outlet, toms shoes, moncler, barbour, ugg pas cher, ugg,ugg australia,ugg italia, louis vuitton, supra shoes, swarovski crystal, juicy couture outlet, montre pas cher, thomas sabo, doke gabbana outlet, ugg,uggs,uggs canada, canada goose, louis vuitton, moncler, sac louis vuitton pas cher, canada goose outlet, swarovski, michael kors handbags, hollister, canada goose uk, juicy couture outlet, moncler, moncler, canada goose, louis vuitton, barbour jackets, pandora charms
ninest123 09.24

 
At 8:03 PM, December 06, 2015 , Blogger Minko Chen said...

lebron shoes
oakley sunglasses wholesale
kobe bryants shoes
cheap football shirts
michael kors outlet online
rolex watches outlet
air jordan 13
tory burch outlet online
north face outlet
swarovski crystal
rolex watches,rolex,watches for men,watches for women,omega watches,replica watches,rolex watches for sale,rolex replica,rolex watch,cartier watches,rolex submariner,fake rolex,rolex replica watches,replica rolex
polo ralph lauren
discount ugg boots
canada goose outelt
michael kors wallet sale
tommy hilfiger
ysl outlet
air force 1 shoes
ugg outlet uk
fred perry polo shirts
1207minko

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home