<

It’s Funny Until Someone Gets Hurt, then it’s Hilarious

Creationists make themselves look foolish when they pick and choose their scienceI’ve been amazed at the popularity of Creationism/Intelligent Design among Christian pundits.

Old-earth Creationism accepts the consensus within the field of cosmology about the Big Bang and the formation of the solar system 4.6 billion years ago but rejects evolution. Young-earth Creationism also rejects evolution and argues that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. This view is predominant among evangelical pastors.

Dr. Karl Giberson recently pointed out an interesting downside of this mindless rejection of science. He begins by citing a Barna survey that lists six reasons why most evangelical Christians disconnect from the church, at least temporarily, after age 15. The most interesting reason: “Churches come across as antagonistic to science.”

Of the young adults surveyed,

  • 23% say they had “been turned off by the creation-versus-evolution debate”
  • 25% say “Christianity is anti-science”
  • 29% say “churches are out of step with the scientific world we live in”
  • 35% say “Christians are too confident they know all the answers”

As an example of this rejection of science, Giberson points to the technique recommended to schoolchildren by Creation Museum founder Ken Ham. Ham encourages students to ask, “Were you there?” when the biology teacher says that life on earth appeared roughly 4 billion years ago or the physics teacher says that the Big Bang gave us the universe in its present form 13.7 billion years ago.

Ham proudly blogged about nine-year-old Emma B., who wrote to tell Ham how she attacked a curator’s statement that a moon rock was 3.75 billion years old with “Were you there?”

Biologist PZ Myers nicely deflated Ham’s anti-science question with a gentle reply to Emma B. Myers recommends using instead “How do you know that?” which is a question from which you can actually learn something.

Contrast that with Ham’s “Were you there?” which is designed simply to shut down discussion and to which you already know the answer.

“Were you there?” is a subset of the more general question, “Did you experience this with your own senses?” To Science, this question lost significance hundreds of years ago. The days when Isaac Newton used taste as a tool to understand new chemicals are long gone. Modern science relies heavily on instruments to reliably provide information about nature—from simple ones like compasses, voltmeters, and pH meters to complex ones like the Pioneer spacecraft, Hubble space telescope, and Large Hadron Collider.

Personal observation is often necessary (finding new animal species, for example), but this is no longer a requirement for obtaining credible scientific evidence.

From the standpoint of mainstream Christianity, Ham’s position as a young-earth Creationist and Bible literalist is a bit extreme, but higher profile figures like William Lane Craig also give themselves the option to pick and choose their science. Craig uses science a lot—at least, when it suits his purposes. The Big Bang suggests a beginning for the universe, so he takes that. Evolution suggests that life on earth didn’t need God, so he rejects that bit.

He imagines that he’s Hanes Inspector Number 12: “It’s not science until I say it’s science.” It may be fun to pretend that, but what could possibly make you think that’s justifiable?

That reminds me of a joke:

Scientists figure out how to duplicate abiogenesis (the process by which molecules became something that could evolve). They are so excited that they email God to say they want to show him. So God clears some time on his calendar and has them in.

“Sounds like you’ve been busy,” God said. “Show me what you’ve got.”

“Okay—first you take some dirt,” said one of the scientists.

“Hold on,” God said. “Get your own dirt.”

And to William Lane Craig’s pontificating about science, I say, “Hold on—get your own science.”

You either play by the rules of science and accept the scientific consensus whether it’s compatible with your preconceptions or not, or you sit at the children’s table. If you want to hang out with the adults, you can’t invent reasons to rationalize why this science is valid and that is not.

Evangelicals may want to rethink this picking and choosing of science. Giberson ends his article:

The dismissive and even hostile approach to science taken by evangelical leaders like Ken Ham accounts for the Barna finding above. In the name of protecting Christianity from a secularism perceived as corrosive to the faith, the creationists are unwittingly driving the best and brightest evangelicals out of the church…. What remains after their exodus is an even more intellectually impoverished parallel culture, with even fewer resources to think about complex issues.

Perhaps I should be more welcoming to Christian anti-science in the future.

Photo credit: commandoscorch

Related posts:

Related links:

  • Karl Giberson, “Creationists Drive Young People Out of the Church,” Huffington Post, 11/19/11.
  • “Six Reasons Young Christians Leave Church,” Barna, 9/28/11.
  • PZ Myers, “Dear Emma B,” Pharyngula blog, 10/3/11.
  • Ted Olsen, “Go Figure,” Christianity Today, 11/14/11.

About Bob Seidensticker
  • http://www.hongkongudy.com Karl Udy

    There are plenty of prominent Christians who are not opposed to science or evolution. Check out Francis Collins, Alister McGrath, Peter Enns, John Lennox, John Polkinghorne, Alvin Plantinga and the aforementioned Karl Giberson.

    I think you have misrepresented William Lane Craig. He does not see evolution as incompatible with theism and considers himself agnostic on the issue.

    I find Ken Ham’s views to be an embarrassment, as do many Christians, and I dismiss them on both scientific and theological grounds. I think you’re drawing a very long bow to try to put William Lane Craig in the same category, though.

    • Retro

      Karl wrote: I think you have misrepresented William Lane Craig. He does not see evolution as incompatible with theism and considers himself agnostic on the issue.

      How has Bob misrepresented Craig?

      Here’s a clip of WLC speaking about Evolution:

      http://www.metacafe.com/fplayer/4023134/the_sheer_lack_of_evidence_for_macro_evolution_william_lane_craig.swf

      Sounds awful familiar doesn’t it? It’s the standard script for Intelligent Design.

      William Lane Craig is also a fellow of the Discovery Institute: http://www.discovery.org/p/85

      Intelligent Design is incompatible with Evolution.

      • http://www.hongkongudy.com Karl Udy

        Wikipedia has quotes on his views on evolution. I guess it would be important to see which of his quotes are more recent to see where he stands now. It is quite possible he has changed his views on evolution.

        • Bob Seidensticker

          As Retro pointed out, it’s trivial to make a case that he has supported Creationism/ID over evolution.

          If he has new views on the subject, I’d be happy to be updated. Let me know if you find something.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      Karl:

      I agree–most Christians have no problem with evolution.

      As for WLC, however, we must be reading different sources. What I’ve heard and read from him are unambiguously anti-evolution.

      Retro–thanks for the links. They nicely make the case.

  • RandomFunction2

    To Bob the Atheist,

    Why do you focus on Christian Fundamentalists rather than addressing the more interesting views of liberal theology (those of Tillich and Spong, for instance)???

    It’s interesting to see that Fundamentalists and the vast majority of Atheists are more alike in their views about religion than either group is to liberal theologians.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      Why focus on liberal Christians when they’re behaving themselves?

      I don’t follow your point that fundamentalists and atheists are similar in their views.

  • RandomFunction2

    To Bob the Atheist,

    Why indeed? I don’t know… maybe because they have the strongest arguments and the most plausible version of Christianity? Isn’t your blog about Christianity in general, or is it only about its most foolish interpretations?

    Atheists and Fundamentalists have equally simplistic views of the Bible and of the meaning of Christianity. Both are remote from the finest Christian scholarship.

    I will grant you something, though. Liberal theology is harder to find than Fundamentalism. Its proponents are less vocal. As you put it, they are behaving themselves.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      maybe because they have the strongest arguments and the most plausible version of Christianity?

      Surely you’re not saying that none of my posts have been relevant to liberal Christians. Here are a few that I think apply to all Christians.

      “Most plausible version of Christianity” sounds as odd as “least nutty version of Voodoo.”

      Isn’t your blog about Christianity in general, or is it only about its most foolish interpretations?

      Both. When I go after more fundamentalist views (anti-homosexual views, anti-abortion, church/state intermingling, and so on), then those Christians who agree with my position can sit at the sidelines and enjoy the show.

      Both are remote from the finest Christian scholarship.

      I don’t think much of Christian scholarship, fine or shabby. But if you want to point me to a couple of theologians with excellent scholarship, I’d appreciate that. I’ll have to ensure that I’m considering their views.

      • RandomFunction2

        To Bob the Atheist,

        You can’t claim that liberal Christianity is tantamount to voodoo, it’s much more sophisticated than that. It’s like if I equated Atheism with Stalinism. It makes no sense.

        Here are two books by liberal theologians which I found helpful:

        - But That I Can’t Believe!, by John A.T. Robinson.
        - Why Christianity Must Change or Die, by Spong.

        Maybe one day you will realize that there is more to Christianity than biblical inerrancy, creationism, Satan, Adam and Eve, blind faith, eternal tortures, divine command theory, exclusivist stances on world religions, and so on…

        • Bob Seidensticker

          When I shine a spotlight on Christian extremism, that’s a good thing from the standpoint of a liberal Christian, right?

          You can’t claim that liberal Christianity is tantamount to voodoo, it’s much more sophisticated than that.

          I think that there’s an important difference in what I said. I said: “’Most plausible version of Christianity’ sounds as odd as ‘least nutty version of Voodoo.’”

          I’ll grant that Christianity is more sophisticated. Given what you know I think about religion, that’s not saying much.

          It’s like if I equated Atheism with Stalinism. It makes no sense.

          Yes, that makes no sense. But I’m simply saying that the most sophisticated item in a pile of false, crazy beliefs is not something to be proud of.

          You can argue that Christianity doesn’t belong in that pile, of course. I’m just saying that, from my standpoint, it is. (And I’m not even sure that I’d call it the most sophisticated. And I realize that that wasn’t your claim.)

          Maybe one day you will realize that there is more to Christianity than biblical inerrancy, creationism, Satan, Adam and Eve, blind faith, eternal tortures, divine command theory, exclusivist stances on world religions, and so on…

          I realize that today.

          What’s your point? That benign Christianity is benign? I realize that as well.

          Thanks for the book recommendations, BTW. I’ve heard Spong being interviewed but haven’t read any of his books. He seems to be similar to Karen Armstrong, another engaging scholar—would you agree?

        • Retro

          From the Wikipedia entry on Louisiana Voodoo:

          The word voodoo comes from the word vudu, the Dahomean “spirit”, an invisible mysterious force that can intervene in human affairs.” The worship of spirits remains a vital part of the practices of voodoo in Louisiana. Followers of Louisiana voodoo believe in one God and multiple lesser but powerful spirits which preside over daily matters of life, such as the family, the sky, and judgment.

          The main focus of Louisiana Voodoo today is to serve others and influence the outcome of life events through the connection with nature, spirits, and ancestors. True rituals are held “behind closed doors” as a showy ritual would be considered disrespectful to the spirits. Voodoo methods include readings, spiritual baths, specially devised diets, prayer, and personal ceremony. Voodoo is often used to cure anxiety, addictions, depression, loneliness, and other ailments. It seeks to help the hungry, the poor, and the sick as Marie Laveau once did.

          Doesn’t really sound all that different from any other religion does it?

  • RandomFunction2

    To Retro,

    How much liberal theology have you read lately?

  • Retro

    From what I see, liberal theologians see the the same problems with traditional Christianity as atheists do, but instead of simply moving on, liberal theologians are trying to hang on to some form of belief.

    Do you accept miracles and the inspiration of scripture? If not, then why not simply become an atheist?

    • RandomFunction2

      To Retro,

      Maybe because we find fulfillment and meaning in belief, but not in absurdities?

      • Retro

        Yeah, I can see that.

        What I should have written was: Do you accept miracles and the inspiration of scripture? If not, then why not simply become a DEIST?

        I guess my point is that it becomes silly past a certain point to still hang onto the name of Christianity.

        If you read the Bible, it is clear that it was not written as an allegory or a myth. It was intended to be actual fact and history. Once you get rid of the superstitious parts of the Bible, what is actually left?

  • RandomFunction2

    To Retro,

    The problem with Deism is that it has no room for revelation or for grace. People are left to their own devices in a cold world.

    But I don’t believe in a revelation as an actual voice coming from heaven or a burning bush (but which no one hears but the prophet). Revelation takes place inside of people’s minds and pushes them to speak intelligently of the Absolute, crossing boundaries raised by prejudice and overthrowing hatred and injustice, giving back people the dignity they had lost. When people are freed, when love overcomes hatred, God is known.

    There is no revelation of God when some self-appointed prophet claims God has spoken to “him” (usually it is a guy) and has given him authority and power. All there is is a gorilla.

    As for grace, evolutionists think that morality evolved naturally. Fine, but they also say that sexism and xenophobia are natural. So nature did produce some immorality. Grace is what allows us to go beyond our beastly inheritance.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      Thanks for that perspective.

      The revelation that you talk about is something that (with some rewording) an atheist might be able to acknowledge. Do you agree?

      As for grace, if (again) you’re simply talking about what we all acknowledge–that humans can be scummy but can also be noble–then why introduce the supernatural?

  • RandomFunction2

    Hi Bob,

    When I say that revelations come from within, I don’t mean to say that God has no part in the process. God works through natural processes and takes our awareness of reality and of ethics to undreamt-of heights. But we don’t perceive God at work within us. We infer that God must have been there when we discover new horizons and new possibilities, and when we overcome fear and hatred. God is the one who makes us whole, who gives us a fresh life and who broadens our sight.

    I agree that folk religion can be explained scientifically. Cognitive psychology knows why we believe in spirits. It’s a product of the brain, or to be more specific, a by-product. Likewise, I am unimpressed by mystical experiences. I think its neurobiology is well understood. Scientists understand, at least to some extent, why mystics experience what they report. Of course, in some sense, we cannot explain what is often reported to be indescribable.

    What I disagree with is that every kind of religion and every aspect of religion are a purely natural phenomenon. By the way, I don’t think God reveals himself only in Christianity. Nor do I think that the Bible is “the Word of God”. What I do think is that the Bible records (more or less faithfully) a few events and a few words in which God was involved (in the sense I mentioned above). But then, I believe God was also involved in Greek philosophy and in Buddhism, for instance. But I also believe every religion, including Christanity, is steeped in sin. Secular humanism is most of the time more benign than religion.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      When I say that revelations come from within, I don’t mean to say that God has no part in the process.

      I’ll grant that God could exist and play a part in the process, but you’re saying that the revelation that humans feel can’t be explained naturally?

      I believe God was also involved in Greek philosophy and in Buddhism, for instance.

      In the movie “Oh God!” George Burns (God) answers the question “Was Jesus your son?” with: “Jesus was my son, Buddha was my son, Mohammed was my son.” Is this what you’re saying? All roads lead to God?

      • Retro

        Bob S wrote: Is this what you’re saying? All roads lead to God?

        Exactly, if God reveals Himself to all religions, and you believe in every religion, then why call yourself some kind of Christian? Wouldn’t calling yourself a Deist be more fitting?

  • RandomFunction2

    To Bob and Retro,

    Some aspects of religion may be explained naturally, but I doubt that Jesus or Buddha are “natural phenomena”. There is something super-human to them.

    Now was Jesus perfect? He may be without sin, though I’m not sure of that. There is some racism in a few of his statements. But toward the end of his ministry, it appears that he overcame racism.

    But he was not omniscient, and he made errors, for instance when he stated that the Torah was written by Moses. Unless of course he never said that and the gospel writers put those words into his mouth.

    Still, he was way above his contemporaries in ethics. Not only in his ethical teachings, but also in his relationships with the poor (I won’t speak of his “miracles”). Which calls for a special explanation. It’s trite saying that people are the products of their times, but Jesus was clearly more than that. So was Buddha.

    I do think some other faiths (and intelligent unbelief) may lead and do lead to God, and therefore to heaven, but not all of them (“cults” are not windows into God). Still, liberal Christianity or some form of open Deism may be the best path to God. This is also the view of a famous theologian of the last century, Troeltsch.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      Some aspects of religion may be explained naturally, but I doubt that Jesus or Buddha are “natural phenomena”. There is something super-human to them.

      Are you saying that all religions are at least partially true? Or that they’re at least partially nudged by God?

      If you say that some are correct and some are not, you’re still in the bind in which you must acknowledge that humans invent religions … but that you have the insight (or good fortune) to have adopted one of the few correct ones.

      There is some racism in a few of his statements.

      Doesn’t the idea that the NT was simply written down by fallible men explain everything? What remains unexplained given this hypothesis?

      Still, he was way above his contemporaries in ethics.

      He was closer to our moral standards than most other sages of the time, and that requires a supernatural explanation?? Why not argue that the NT was the work of many people, both in the autographs and in the “corrections” likely added over time, and that the end result was some decent morality plus some crap?

      • RandomFunction2

        Hi Bob,

        Of course that people invent religions. Some of them can be completely explained by science and history. Still, some elements of some religions seem to transcend scientific explanations. Why are there prophets?

        And I agree that the NT contains some “crap” and was written by fallible men. I don’t believe in biblical inerrancy. Still, they point to Jesus, who is not an ordinary human being, but one with God’s grace.

        I think you are downplaying the revolutionary teachings of Jesus because we got used to it for 2000 years.

        • Bob Seidensticker

          Still, some elements of some religions seem to transcend scientific explanations. Why are there prophets?

          What are these elements that transcend scientific explanations? I don’t see why prophets are a big deal–some guy gets it into his head that he’s anointed by God (or those around him do). What’s the big deal? Again, a natural explanation IMO.

          I think you are downplaying the revolutionary teachings of Jesus because we got used to it for 2000 years.

          An interesting idea. Instead of looking back at Jesus and seeing much of ourselves in him (and therefore concluding that he was ahead of his time), we could explain our own enlightenment by saying that Jesus got us here. But why not make the same supernatural claim of other ordinary wise men–must we conclude that Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and others from the past were divine?

          And I don’t think much of the entire corpus of Jesus’s statements. Perhaps you could look at them and see them as ahead of their time (like those of other philosophers), but there was still some bad stuff there–he didn’t reject slavery, he didn’t reject the genocide in the OT, and so on.

  • RandomFunction2

    Hi Bob,

    The problem is that some prophets of the past had religious and ethical insights that were ahead of the stage of development of their respective cultures. THAT’S the big deal. How can someone rise above the crowd and see farther?

    You are correct that the West owes much to Greek philosophy in addition to Christianity, and I do think some Greek philosophers may have been inspired by God. The development of rationality was probably part of God’s plan. At any rate, it was not AGAINST it.

    True, Jesus did not condemn slavery, but the spirit of his teachings is incompatible with it. The kinds of human relations that are involved in slavery cannot be reconciled with how Jesus viewed brotherly love and the demands of the Kingdom.

    As for genocide in the OT, it’s hard to say, because no one seems to have bothered to ask for Jesus’ opinion. But Jesus rejected a lot of the OT, even when he claimed that he respected his religion. For instance he rejected food taboos and animal sacrifice. This may not strike you as impressive, but it’s because we got used to Christianity and it has shaped our commonsense. If you were a first-century Jew, you would be able to see how revolutionary these moves were.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      RF2:

      I do think some Greek philosophers may have been inspired by God.

      OK–at least you’re consistent and don’t simply single out Jesus for divine status. But again, why point to a supernatural explanation when the natural explanation is plausible and sufficient? You’ve got the Greek culture that encourages new thinking, and the top people from that culture put forward groundbreaking new ideas. Very cool, but why is the natural explanation unsatisfactory?

      True, Jesus did not condemn slavery, but the spirit of his teachings is incompatible with it.

      I’m simply asking how enlightened (from our vantage point) Jesus was if you would’ve made some very different points. Random Christ would’ve made absolutely clear that slavery was wrong (maybe polygamy too) and that many examples of God’s handiwork (global flood, Canaanite genocide, Sodom & Gomorrah) were wrong and should in no way be considered as moral guidelines–not back then and not now.

      The kinds of human relations that are involved in slavery cannot be reconciled with how Jesus viewed brotherly love and the demands of the Kingdom.

      I’m unconvinced. If Jesus abhorred slavery (as Random Christ would’ve), he would’ve made it super clear that that was off the table.

      If you were a first-century Jew, you would be able to see how revolutionary these moves were.

      “True–Jesus didn’t abolish slavery, but he got rid of food laws, so that was pretty cool” isn’t impressive, sorry. I have higher standards for God.

  • RandomFunction2

    Hi Bob,

    It’s hard to scientifically explain human creativity. Why did philosophy arise in Greece? Why Jesus? Why Buddha? To some extent, we can conceive natural explanations, and we will improve them endlessly, but they don’t work as in physical sciences. Part of human phenomena is free, spontaneous and unpredictable.

    Remark that it is true as well of literature. Part of it is explicable by historical, social, psychological constraints and that’s the business of scholars to investigate. But part of it is due to the writers’ sheer creativity and insight. We will never fully know why Homer’s Odyssey had to be that way.

    I will be blunt. The historical Jesus may have had defects. But the Spirit of God is not constrained by Jesus or by any Church. It works as well in philosophers/atheists/activists’ hearts. I heard that some stoics did condemn slavery. That may be the work of God in them. Of course I don’t mean to belittle their merits.

    I’m not a Deist, because Deists don’t believe that God cares about people, and they don’t believe in any kind of revelation (except some kind of natural/general revelation). But I don’t believe either that truth is limited to one tribe.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      Granted–we will never know what drove Homer to make the Odyssey the way he did (or even what that way was, since we’re so far removed from what he originally said). Why Socrates was singled out by fate to have a tremendous impact on Western thought (how much was being in the right place at the right time, for example?) may remain a mystery.

      But these puzzles in no way point to a supernatural explanation.

      But the Spirit of God is not constrained by Jesus or by any Church.

      But now you’ve jumped to presupposing God. Is that your point–that you want to simply presuppose him rather than come to God as an evidence-grounded conclusion? If you’re simply saying, “Look–this is just what I believe, OK?” then I say, OK. I’m unclear where evidence comes into your views.

  • RandomFunction2

    Hi Bob,

    In all this debate, you may have got the upper hand. There is something intrinsically appealing to the naturalistic worldview, and my theology, so far, does not seem to have met its challenge.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      You’re refreshingly honest and a pleasure to argue with. Thanks for that.

  • RandomFunction2

    Hi Bob,

    I think the biggest problem I face is the god of the gaps. Why would I appeal to God’s Spirit/grace/revelation before I have made sure that it is impossible to scientifically explain human phenomena?

    • Bob Seidensticker

      I agree.

      Are you saying that you’re still in the inquiry phase? It sounded like you’d already made the plunge into faith.

      • RandomFunction2

        Hi Bob,

        Well, I’m still seeking the meaning of what I believe. Some statements of faith are unbelievable and must be discarded. Others may pass the tests. In theology, there is a difference between faith and the beliefs that express it. There is also a difference between the meaning of a creed and the language it uses.

  • Pingback: Scientist Thinking vs. Lawyer Thinking

  • Pingback: hefalimp cardijon

  • Pingback: cialis original livraison rapide

  • Pingback: delay cream for premature ejaculation

  • Pingback: online slots

  • Pingback: cialis 2.5mg prix

  • Pingback: dog bed

  • Pingback: acheter cialis internet

  • Pingback: stop premature ejaculation video

  • Pingback: macarons kopen belgie

  • Pingback: cialis generique france

  • Pingback: cialis e varicocele

  • Pingback: automotive

  • Pingback: goat sex

  • Pingback: cialis 10mg generique

  • Pingback: cialis 20 mg originale

  • Pingback: URL

  • Pingback: mmpr licensed producers mmpr licensed producers

  • Pingback: buy youtube likes

  • Pingback: lawyer

  • Pingback: keurig b150 review

  • Pingback: achat cialis generic

  • Pingback: San Antonio attorney Alexander Begum

  • Pingback: cialis prima o dopo i pasti

  • Pingback: desensitizing creams for premature ejaculation reviews

  • Pingback: cialis in farmacia

  • Pingback: acheter tadalafil 20mg

  • Pingback: metatron cube

  • Pingback: Ceiling Fan Installation

  • Pingback: Skip Trowel Texture

  • Pingback: shakeology reviews 2013

  • Pingback: conspiracies among governments

  • Pingback: R.G. Menzies Scholarship to Harvard

  • Pingback: Live Bee Removal Kingwood

  • Pingback: ejakulation

  • Pingback: physics chemistry biology tutor

  • Pingback: used car dealerships

  • Pingback: Service Add Follower

  • Pingback: hyundai assurance

  • Pingback: urinary tract cancer cells helped in by Pioglitazone

  • Pingback: alternative medicine

  • Pingback: motorcycle accident lawyer

  • Pingback: android apps

  • Pingback: creativity & art wallpapers

  • Pingback: yarn

  • Pingback: Betboo

  • Pingback: homes in santa maria for sale

  • Pingback: Squirrel Removal Katy

  • Pingback: cialis dopo i pasti

  • Pingback: Coupons

  • Pingback: bets10

  • Pingback: Learn How To Make Cash With Instagram

  • Pingback: MovieStarPlanet Cheats

  • Pingback: iphone6

  • Pingback: make money with twitter

  • Pingback: bee wild pest control

  • Pingback: Best whatsapp status

  • Pingback: check out more writing from the writer

  • Pingback: how long can a girl last in bed

  • Pingback: Entertainment News

  • Pingback: ac repair spring

  • Pingback: House eviction

  • Pingback: at-home care

  • Pingback: projector bulbs for sale

  • Pingback: best online slots games

  • Pingback: free online slots with nudges

  • Pingback: sabotaging relationships

  • Pingback: Transparency is becoming a priority among top #Bitcoin influencers

  • Pingback: online slot machines games

  • Pingback: DUI Lawyer Denver

  • Pingback: m?s info

  • Pingback: emotional intelligence training

  • Pingback: click here

  • Pingback: m?s informaci?n

  • Pingback: hydrocodone without prescription

  • Pingback: tramadol without prescription

  • Pingback: click here

  • Pingback: film izle

  • Pingback: navigate to these guys

  • Pingback: xlovecam token gratuit t�l�charger

  • Pingback: plum lipstick

  • Pingback: buy ambien online

  • Pingback: buy oxycontin

  • Pingback: Bee Wild Pest Control

  • Pingback: free online puzzle game

  • Pingback: Exterminator Service Houston Texas

  • Pingback: openappmkt

  • Pingback: FanDuel Promo Code

  • Pingback: free slots 4u

  • Pingback: gap visa credit card

  • Pingback: desinger saree shopping

  • Pingback: compare auto insurance quote

  • Pingback: e-cigarette

  • Pingback: orange county bail bonds

  • Pingback: free slot games online

  • Pingback: car insurance quotes nj

  • Pingback: Persewaan toyota Elf surabaya

  • Pingback: NET, DotNet, C#, ASP.NET, VB.NET, C++.Net

  • Pingback: macchina fotografica reflex offerte tim

  • Pingback: Lettings agent surbiton

  • Pingback: how long do people last in bed

  • Pingback: banana blue

  • Pingback: Cialis

  • Pingback: blog de musica

  • Pingback: fathers rights

  • Pingback: investor

  • Pingback: buy seo packages

  • Pingback: witryna

  • Pingback: www.Ath-m50.net

  • Pingback: fat loss diet

  • Pingback: food recipes

  • Pingback: arkitekter kobenhavn

  • Pingback: cavaleiros do zodiaco

  • Pingback: mm tangkas

  • Pingback: elado budaorsi ingatlanok

  • Pingback: real soundcloud plays

  • Pingback: descuentos web

  • Pingback: press play

  • Pingback: hearthstone arena guide

  • Pingback: Hack Facebook Account

  • Pingback: h05vvh6-f 24x0 75

  • Pingback: CPTG

  • Pingback: Chromebox

  • Pingback: share code snippets

  • Pingback: important link

  • Pingback: minecraft for free

  • Pingback: free mass email software

  • Pingback: Livejasmin Hack update

  • Pingback: razor bump cream for women

  • Pingback: the plumbing cure

  • Pingback: tangkas meja darat

  • Pingback: chandler roofing fort worth texas

  • Pingback: pw standard t6010a1 corner shelf

  • Pingback: Otto Jerabek

  • Pingback: Wigs Denver

  • Pingback: inbound marketing

  • Pingback: filtros de agua

  • Pingback: visit our website

  • Pingback: Zebra Printer Repair

  • Pingback: Link exchange directory

  • Pingback: aluminium gutters

  • Pingback: Kayseri Evden eve Nakliyat

  • Pingback: ganool

  • Pingback: taofriends

  • Pingback: hyaluronic acid serum

  • Pingback: theplumbingcure.com

  • Pingback: Read This

  • Pingback: Chemistry

  • Pingback: M88

  • Pingback: MANSION88

  • Pingback: Boulder garage doors

  • Pingback: synthetic oil change coupons

  • Pingback: Julefrokost

  • Pingback: Law Book Store

  • Pingback: event space

  • Pingback: Buy Link Building Packages

  • Pingback: trail gear

  • Pingback: husa htc desire 310

  • Pingback: sprayer

  • Pingback: Pressplay Matt Callen

  • Pingback: enrabar gajas virgens

  • Pingback: proxy service

  • Pingback: Wholesale Christian Jewelry

  • Pingback: weight loss plan diet

  • Pingback: Deals

  • Pingback: download yaamirukka bayamey la la song

  • Pingback: Macaron

  • Pingback: Jeffrey Arsenault Old Greenwich

  • Pingback: The Luxury Spot

  • Pingback: Men's leather

  • Pingback: funko toys

  • Pingback: colonie de vacances

  • Pingback: supra trainers uk

  • Pingback: make money online surveys

  • Pingback: computer accessories

  • Pingback: somanabolic muscle maximizer

  • Pingback: Estee Lauder Gift

  • Pingback: buy rap beats

  • Pingback: Nigerian Music

  • Pingback: lose weight quickly

  • Pingback: Stitch a Photo

  • Pingback: odziez reklamowa

  • Pingback: renowacja parkietu warszawa

  • Pingback: omlat.net

  • Pingback: 3docean free

  • Pingback: kliknij

  • Pingback: Fun

  • Pingback: mobile spy software for samsung galaxy

  • Pingback: binary options trading strategy 2014

  • Pingback: kangen

  • Pingback: webdesign

  • Pingback: Lit tiroir pas chère

  • Pingback: kangen water machine

  • Pingback: Traditional Chinese Medicine Five Dock

  • Pingback: Remarkamobile Blog

  • Pingback: Copyrightingo paslaugos

  • Pingback: SEO straipsniai

  • Pingback: hydrocodone without prescription

  • Pingback: percocet

  • Pingback: buy visitors

  • Pingback: practice areas xlawsuits xarelto

  • Pingback: kinder surprise egg

  • Pingback: xarelto lawsuits

  • Pingback: Positive Pregnancy Tests

  • Pingback: r?ttshj?lp

  • Pingback: cialis online without prescription

  • Pingback: Cheap Prefab Houses for sale in UAE, OMAN AND GULF

  • Pingback: Rob Palano

  • Pingback: rinnai water heaters

  • Pingback: cheapest cab orlando, orlando cheap taxi

  • Pingback: Snapalicious

  • Pingback: legalizacion de documentos

  • Pingback: viagra without prescription

  • Pingback: cars 2 surprise eggs

  • Pingback: iphone screen repair

  • Pingback: import z chin


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X