Getting off Mount Atheism

Leah Libresco (of “Unequally Yoked”) suggested the idea of a local maximum as a helpful way of looking at competing worldviews. This is a great analogy, and I’d like to share my interpretation of it.

Imagine an undulating surface with mountain peaks of various sizes, like this surface (left). This space is Rationality, and the higher you are on the surface, the better that spot explains reality.

I hope the analogy remains clear as we explore this fantasy world. I realize it’s imperfect, but I think it gives both insights and a new vocabulary for discussing worldview changes. Here goes …

If you’re on a slope in Rationality space, you realize that you can do better, so you climb higher (by study or discussion, for example). When you get to the top of your mountain, movement in any direction takes you to a place that does a poorer job of explaining reality. You’ve now reached a local maximum. Let’s add a little ambiguity by imagining that it’s foggy, so you connect with other people who share your mountain. With time, study, and discussion, you might be discover that your mountain goes higher still, and you become even more pleased with your position.

Things look pretty good … but what if you’d climbed a different mountain? Maybe that mountain would be higher and provide a more complete explanation of reality.

Another mountain is hard to get to. From your current location, a step in any direction takes you to a worse spot, and because you’d move down into the saddle between two peaks, it would get a lot worse before it got better. This mountain change (that is: worldview change) isn’t to be taken lightly.

The open-minded Catholic (say) at the top of one mountain might wonder how things look from other mountains (the atheist or Buddhist or New Age mountains, for example), so she asks the atheist. The atheist assures her that his mountain is far higher than hers—but of course that’s what he would say. If he didn’t think that his perch was the best, he’d be at the top of a different mountain. It would be a rare person—someone who was dissatisfied with an old view and was slogging through Rationality space searching for something better—who would not recommend their current position.

People sometimes spend years in the investigation required to trek from one spot to another, moving from Fundamentalist Christianity to Buddhism to New Age to atheism, for example. That’s not to say that the journey was a waste. It can be a educational and even enjoyable process, but it can also be a long one.

I’d like to map onto this analogy my hypothesis that well-informed atheists never convert (through rational arguments) to Christianity. Those wandering listlessly around the base of Mount Atheism could call themselves atheists, though they have put little time into finding more about Rationality space or climbing higher. Not knowing the various options, they could be convinced to follow Christians to one of their mountains. This is the Type 2 atheist converting to Christianity.

Others take a different path. Not only do they climb Mount Atheism, but they also explore the various Christian peaks well enough to speak with confidence about how they compare. Or perhaps the order is the reverse: they start from a thorough knowledge of a Christian peak (and an initial confidence in the rightness of that position) and then go far afield to understand the terrain around the atheist peak.

My hypothesis is that those who understand that terrain and conclude that Mount Atheism is the place to remain, the Type 3 atheists, are stuck there with no path to anything higher.

Let’s consider again Richard Morgan’s remarkable story. He was at the top of Mount Atheism but was transported in an instant to the Christian peak. He was familiar with the landscape—Christianity wasn’t a strange place to him—but he teleported there and has remained there for four years now.

A Type 3 atheist—the well-informed kind like Richard Morgan—can teleport to a Christian peak that he already knows well, but this doesn’t give the rest of us a trail. Denied the option of teleportation, atheists look for a new route.

Translated, these atheists are looking for intellectual arguments that show that the Christian worldview explains reality better. And they are still waiting.

Reality is a cold and heartless bitch,
and I love her for it.
— someone on The Nonprophets podcast

Photo credit: Wikimedia

About Bob Seidensticker
  • Richard S. Russell

    Well, you said up front that it was an imperfect analogy, so this criticism of it may be based more on that imperfection than on any real-world counterpart to it, but you speak as if one is setting up housekeeping at wherever one happens to be in this undulating landscape. However, in real life you are never committed to any one particular location. You’re free to wander all over and scope things out without feeling the need to put down earnest money wherever you go. I don’t see that exploring your options with regard to philosophy is any different. Just because you visit and stock up on tourist brochures doesn’t constitute a lifelong commitment to citizenship.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      OK, but you can’t be simultaneously a Christian, Buddhist, and atheist. You can make an amalgam (which really doesn’t fit with this analogy), but I think setting up housekeeping is the way to see it.

      Exploring much of the territory means that you’re conversant from many viewpoints. You could speak as if you were a Bahai or Scientologist or whatever you’ve explored. But when someone asks you how you identify, you point back to the single place where you have your tent set up.

      Or am I missing something?

      • Ted Seeber

        You are missing that at least two of your three *do not reject the testimony of others*. Whether it is the Dali Lama quoting Christ or the Catholic Nostra Aetate, the real heights are ALWAYS reached by taking the good of the other and adding it to what you already know without rejecting what you already know.

        • Bob Seidensticker

          The atheist typically says, “There is no compelling evidence for for god belief.”

          Do the Catholics and (religious) Buddhists also not reject this statement?

  • DrewL

    I’d like to map onto this analogy my hypothesis that well-informed atheists never convert (through rational arguments) to Christianity.

    So it’s okay to profess the No True Scotsman fallacy if you add a diagram? Fascinating.

    • stop2wonder

      His original article acknowledges the No True Scotsman fallacy concern and addresses it; you may want to read it.

      • joeclark77

        If by “addresses” you mean “makes an excuse” and keeps on using it, sure.

      • http://theophor.us Ignatius Theophorus

        There is more incorrect than just “no true scotsman.” His very definition is flawed. You should read the comments to his attempt at applying his argument.

  • matthew


    It’s not a fallacy if you can’t provide examples of atheists who were converted by rational arguments. So far, the last thread kinda came up empty.

    However, if you disagree, please provide the rational argument which converted an atheist to some form of religion.

    • joeclark77

      The last three thread listed three atheists and acknowledged that two of them were converted by rational arguments. Bob then simply said that the first one was “no true atheist” and of the third one, that whatever argument persuaded her, he didn’t really want to know the details of it.

      • matthew

        Libresco has been questioned by several authors on patheos for information on her conversion. As pointed out on the previous thread, she intially agreed to discuss it, then never got around to the discussion. So I’m at a loss to see how you can claim she was converted by a rational argument. We really can’t evaluate the argument if we don’t know what it was.

        I’d also add that it is my understanding that she was a dualist before her conversion. I can see how she could still be broadly defined as an atheist. However, belief in the supernatural does put one in an odd category of atheism.

        • http://www.mccaughan.org.uk/g/ g

          I don’t think she was a supernaturalist before her conversion. She did hold some views about metaethics that are unusual among atheists, but I don’t see that they amounted to dualism. Am I missing something?

        • joeclark77

          The question is not whether she converted (we know she did). The question is whether she converted for intellectual reasons. (It is not what those reasons were.) The answer is yes. No one has made any claim that Leah had a religious epiphany or near-death experience. Furthermore, Bob has tried to excuse and deflect the acknowledgement that she breaks his hypothesis in at least two ways so far: first, by saying that her reasons must be “new”, i.e., can’t be any of the hundreds or thousands of good reasons discovered by others over the past several millenia, and second, by implying that it doesn’t count if she doesn’t give him an explicit and convincing outline of her reasoning.

        • http://theophor.us Ignatius Theophorus

          He also rejects her reasoning as being not reasonable enough.

        • Baal

          As an atheist myself, I’d love to see a compelling reasonable argument for Gods existence (deism) let alone why the xtian god of three parts is the right and only one. Leah’s answer seems to be that there must be an objective moral force floating around. I don’t find that very reasonable. Morality looks an awful lot like it’s a mix of biology and environment (just as you’d expect in a non-supernatural universe).

  • DrewL

    Matthew: Fallacies are fallacies regardless of empirical reality.

    Stop2wonder: Bob hasn’t recognized that he defines “rational arguments” AND “well-informed atheists” in ways that by definition exclude all cases to the contrary: IF conversion, THEN it wasn’t a well-informed atheist, or IF conversion through arguments, THEN said arguments are not rational. Bob sets himself up as infallible declarer of what’s rational or irrational. Because the definitions are so selectively manipulated, this hypothesis becomes non-falsifiable.

    Again, from wikipedia, this is the very definition of No True Scotsman fallacy:
    When the statement “all A are B” is qualified like this to exclude those A which are not B, this is a form of begging the question; the conclusion is assumed by the definition of “true A”.

    • matthew


      I pointed out that since you hadn’t presented the rational argument which could convert and atheist, you really haven’t met the conditions of the fallacy.

      So, for the second time, please present the rational argument and the atheist it converted. Then we can declare “No True Scottsman” if Bob refuses to acknowledge the point.

      • DrewL

        Matthew: You don’t “disprove” logical fallacies by producing counter-evidence. From the wikipedia example:

        Alice: All Scotsmen enjoy haggis.
        Bob: My uncle is a Scotsman, and he doesn’t like haggis!
        Alice: Well, all true Scotsmen like haggis.

        The Bob in this example could produce plenty of Scotsmen that dislike haggis, but Alice simply has to categorize them as not “true” Scotsmen. So it is with “rational arguments”: because new atheists subscribe to a definition of rationalism that rejects “faith” a priori (they are 300 years behind in philosophy), they will categorize any argument that is sympathetic to or endorses faith as not TRULY rational. It’s a full-proof system; there will be no counter-examples! A hypothesis so good it doesn’t need to be tested!

        But at the end of the day, you’re just Alice with your fingers in your ears professing your dogmatic faith that TRUE scotsmen enjoy haggis.

        • Jason

          The True Scotsman fallacy that everyone is citing is deliberately ridiculous. We all know that one’s national identity or ethnicity cannot be defined by food preference. So it’s Alice’s original definition that is problematic. If Alice’s initial definition is correct and a Scotsman is exclusively defined as someone who likes haggis, then she is right: Bob’s uncle is NOT a Scotsman.

          The question here is whether or not Bob S.’s original definition was ridiculous, like the one used by Alice. If I understand correctly, Bob S. is saying that a well informed atheist is very unlikely to convert to a religion because it will be impossible to produce winning arguments based on reason and evidence in favor of supernatural belief. But Drew, you seem to be saying that Bob S.’s hypothesis is a fallacy because his original definition is faulty. It seems to me that this whole discussion would be pointless if we said that any reason anyone can come up with counts.

          Here’s are better examples:
          Jason: All stars are hot.
          Drew: But Pluto’s not hot?
          Jason: And Pluto’s not a star (duh!)
          Jason: All convincing arguments need reason and evidence.
          Drew: But Christianity requires faith.
          Jason: Then Christianity is not a winning argument (duh!)

        • DrewL

          Thanks for engaging this, Jason. You’re perceptive to see it comes down to definitions. To this end, has Bob provided a consistent definition of “well-informed atheist” and “rational arguments”? And more importantly, is this definition left intentionally malleable so that it can selectively expand or contract to rule out counter-examples? I can’t say it better than Wikipedia:
          When the statement “all A are B” is qualified like this to exclude those A which are not B, this is a form of begging the question; the conclusion is assumed by the definition of “true A”.

          Because Bob has chosen to use rather undefined concepts as “well-informed atheist” and “rational arguments,” he is making this type of argument:

          Bob: No significant thinkers of the 17th century believed in God.
          Challenger: Isaac Newton believed in God.
          Bob: He wasn’t significant. Hypothesis proven.

          The burden is on him to develop a definition that won’t be adjusted post hoc to rule out counter-examples. This is particularly tricky for his definition of “rational argument,” as you’re pointing out. If, as you seem to argue, “it will be impossible to produce winning arguments based on reason and evidence in favor of supernatural belief,” Bob has committed the very definition of No True Scotsman in making a hypothesis that can’t be disproven or empirically tested: we already know rational arguments couldn’t be anything but atheism-affirming, otherwise they aren’t rational.

        • Matthew

          Your analogy would be more accurate if ran like this:

          Alice: No True Scotsman likes Haggis.
          Bob: My uncle is a Scotsman, and I don’t know if he’s ever had Haggis!

          So I understand the fallacy, I’m pointing out that you’ve given no examples of Bob committing it.

          I understand also that you’re trying to work around the lack of concrete examples by asserting the New Atheists rule out “faith” based arguments as rational a priori and that you feel this is incorrect. However, you’ve really only made a bare assertion to support this argument so I don’t have a problem rejecting it. If you care to support it, please do.

          But again, that brings us back to examples. If you feel Bob has committed the fallacy, please provide a rational argument that has converted an atheist. If you wish to expand or redefine rational then provide us your definition.

        • DrewL

          …please provide a rational argument that has converted an atheist.
          There will be none. See my other response. “Rational” implies atheism-affirming in the new atheism universe, or actually: “an argument we high-minded atheists subscribe to.” It’s the beauty of circular logic and non-falsifiable beliefs: no messy counter-examples!

        • Kodie

          Drewl – There is no evidence of god that any person ever has been able to share. There have been “good enough for me” arguments for many, many people. It’s good enough for a lot of people, but it’s not evidence. I think the existence of a god is preposterous and I have not been moved to believe in a deity by any argument given by you theists. That doesn’t mean a good argument doesn’t exist – if your (or any) deity exists, there ought to be a good way to get that information around other than people duping people. If your deity is the correct deity out of all the possible religions, then I ought to be able to hear him loud and clear any time I ask, whether I believe he’s there or not, and not rely on all these weak ramblings and guessings and rationalizations and excuses to cover up why he might never show up to people who are not inclined to believe in him (totally besides all the way things are instead of how they should be). I suspect it’s because all you know it sounds completely made up but you have to try not to look so gullible to your smart friends.

          Most of it just contradicts reality, so if someone has an experience that contradicts what they are familiar with reality, are they wise enough to dismiss this as something that can actually happen and it’s not a spooky coincidence? If they had a new thought toward religion and decided they could not dismiss it or rationalize it, how are they supposed to explain that to me? A lot of people think stupid and nutty things already that have nothing to do with religion, think a lot of untrue things, rumors, they trust their gut, follow bad advice, buy hype, they live in a world where they are easily taken advantage of and led astray – so no, I’m thinking they don’t always know what they’re talking about so why would I believe they had had an intellectual conversion? Just because they think they used their brain to get from A to B doesn’t mean the thoughts on the way followed sound logic.

          Whether or not we agree what intellectual or informed means, logic doesn’t have a lot of room and neither does evidence. I think every believer needs some form of proof to believe, some cause and effect or warm fuzzies they associate with their deity. It’s not logical – so far – to make the conclusion of a deity from any sense that anyone ever has that there is one. No evidence to share, no breaking news here, just another person who can’t tell what they’re looking at, a sunset, a baby, a piece of toast, etc., and decides the line of reasoning goes straight to a particular deity and all his rules and advice and stuff. Some people might try to dive deeper into philosophies, and that’s pretty intellectual, I’d say it beats being too stupid to know what causes a sunset, and they try to discern what god might be like by assuming he’s like they are. “Most plausible”? No, equally arbitrary.

          If anyone had any evidence that god exists, we’d all have to believe in the same one, and ONLY THEN could you begin to discuss compulsory obedience to it as a matter of public policy. Since we don’t all believe in the same one, there must be no one out there with proof that god exists and everything they say is just guessing and leading and following and contradicting reality.

        • Bob Seidensticker


          If there were evidence for God, Christians would be celebrating that, and not faith. That they are reduced to celebrating faith is a huge clue that the emperor has no clothes.

        • Kodie

          I actually wonder about that, since they deny things for which there is evidence, but people like IDers make up very convincing acts of scientishness – you know, for those not easily enough convinced the unbelievable fairy tale of Genesis. It is so important to them to deny evidence of evolution that even if there was evidence of god, Christians would still be Christians about it anyway, warping reality to fit their myths. There has always been the idea that the Jesus they’ve been expecting could show up and say he’s Jesus and we’d lock him up because that would be crazy. And why can some preachers assure some Christians they are the real deal while others see through it and recognize it for a slick sales pitch? Everyone knows all this stuff and they use it every day to avoid traps!

          There could be evidence for a god, hypothetically, but we still have a problem of what kind of evidence would convince not just one atheist, not just all atheists, but everyone. A god who contradicts most people’s full and lingering beliefs about what he’s supposed to be like will find him inadequate or even devilish. It just keeps getting weirder and weirder.

        • DrewL

          Kodie: Thank you, you have moved the discussion forward:

          I think the existence of a god is preposterous and I have not been moved to believe in a deity by any argument given by you theists.

          Very good, so let’s do a correction of Bob’s hypothesis to what he (and you) are REALLY hypothesizing here. When he says…

          Well-informed atheists never convert to Christianity through rational arguments.

          …what he actually means is….

          Well-informed atheists never convert to Christianity through arguments I find persuasive.

          Solid hypothesis. Not a logical fallacy of any kind. It is empirically testable and empirically true. You guys should have started here and avoided the whole No True Scotsman thing.

        • Kodie

          Well informed atheists never convert to Christianity for logical reasons. Nobody converts to Christianity for logical reasons. It’s still possible I will be told an argument that I find persuasive, but I will have to approach it as if it’s not a logical. The way you think you’re outsmarting anyone is amusing.

        • DrewL

          You’ve conceded my point. Maybe you could now convince Bob his “hypothesis” is actually an irrefutable belief statement, and his posts about “testing” a “hypothesis” are simply a performance of holding up reality to beliefs that are not empirically open to alteration. A 6th grader could tell you that’s not hypothesis testing, regardless of what diagrams we add.

        • Bob Seidensticker

          Kodie: Yep, this asymmetry is the point. Christianity-to-atheism provides lots of reasons for the conversion–reasons that later de-converts will cite (and lament that they’d heard those reasons but had been blind to them). Atheism-to-Christianity doesn’t provide any reasons–intellectual reasons, anyway.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      Hi, Drew. Dropping by again to mark some territory?

      When Christians become atheists, they have long lists of things that they now know but (for whatever reason) rejected as Christians. They’ve left for good reasons. But these new Christians don’t point out the flaws in atheists’ thinking as they leave atheism. That’s the point.

      But I think this was pretty clear from the previous posts.

      • DrewL

        You’ve still fallen into the same trap as Matthew did: “it’s not a logical fallacy if it just so happens to be true. “”Alice” from the Wikipedia example would take the same tactic you have.

        But you’re also raising a faulty empirical point now. Based on the very limited account you’ve given of these converted atheists, let’s look at this statement from Morgan:

        “…but it’s as if there’s an added perception being put into my mind to see beyond that and to see how limited and inadequate all these explanations are.”

        Here you have an atheist saying his former way of thinking was inadequate or insufficient. So previously Morgan believed: these philosophical arguments are completely adequate to tell me everything I need to know. Presently, he believes: these philosophical arguments are now inadequate to tell me everything I need to know. Sounds like a flaw in thinking.

        Like Alice from wikipedia, you will now need to do a post hoc categorization of this statement into the category that will serve to “prove” your hypothesis. That’s the beauty to non-falsifiable hypotheses: it’s why fundamentalists have been using them for years.

        • Bob Seidensticker

          What I need to see and haven’t is an atheist-to-Christianity conversion where the atheist reveals to the world the flaws in atheist thinking. Doesn’t happen–and that’s the point. The reverse (Christian-to-atheist deconversion) is always (in my experience) accompanied by the intellectual reasons for the conversion.

          But I repeat myself.

        • DrewL

          I’ll repeat myself too then:
          Morgan as atheist: This is a completely adequate explanation.
          Morgan as Christian: This is not a completely adequate explanation.

          I see someone recognizing a deficiency or, in your language, a flaw. But you can categorize as needed.

        • J-Rex

          So what were his reasons?
          Obviously he became a Christian because he thought it was a better explanation for the world, and that’s all his statement says. But why did he think so?
          “…but it’s as if there’s an added perception being put into my mind”
          That seems like a very spiritual reason. You can never convince someone else by telling them that it’s just been put into your mind that this is correct. That’s not a logical explanation at all.

          So it is with “rational arguments”: because new atheists subscribe to a definition of rationalism that rejects “faith” a priori

          because faith is not based on reason. It is, by definition, belief without evidence, meaning you can never prove it to anyone. If there is a god, it is clear that s/he chooses to use the emotions of people as the only “proof.” That’s the closest thing to proof I ever had, but as soon as you realize that those emotions exist outside of a religious context, or that people of all religions have those same emotions “proving” that they’re right, you’re left with no reasons to believe.

        • DrewL

          J-Rex: you’re the only person here recognizing that “rationality” has no god-given, handed-down-from-the-universe definition. It can only exist within a wider theory of knowledge, epistemology, and truth (keep in mind all the philosophers who introduced the concept of “rationalism” were deists and Christians, so it’s not inherently corrosive to faith). Thank you for presenting pieces of definition here: perhaps others will follow your lead.

  • joeclark77

    Bob, we understand what local maxima are. Your problem is that you are merely asserting that the atheist peak is highest. Considering your utter lack of curiosity about the other peaks, it’s a bold assertion. You don’t have to read the books that I read (although you keep on asking for the arguments that persuaded people like me), but it’s beyond ridiculous that you aren’t even interested in PHILOSOPHY and you claim to have explored all the mountains of rationality and intellect.

    • Arkenaten

      In the case of god belief verses atheism, philosophy is irrelevant to what Bob is trying to demonstrate on these particular posts.
      Based on the material Christians and other religious people use to deduce that there are gods then not a single religious convert to will be able to produce an intellectual argument for their conversion.
      Why do you keep hammering on that intellectualism is the basis for god belief when quite patently it is nothing of the sort.

    • Spambot3049

      joeclark77 said: “Your problem is that you are merely asserting that the atheist peak is highest.”

      I think Bob went even further than that and asserted that there is such a thing a Highest Peak. Usually atheists say all mountains are equally high, everything is relative, no one’s mountain is higher than any other, etc. Bob says (and I agree with him), that some so-called “mountains” are clearly not as high (i.e., provide less recognition of reality) than other mountains.

      • jose

        Are you conflating descriptions of nature with morality? No atheist that I know of would claim that science and religion are equally high and that their power to describe reality is relative.

      • Bob Seidensticker

        Spambot: Maybe we’re confusing our metaphors here, but I’ve never met an atheist who would say that all worldviews are equally valid. I think atheism is the best view (though obviously I can’t say that with certainty), and I’m happy to argue this position.

      • J-Rex

        I love it when Christians morph all their ideas of what people who disagree with them think into one idea and stuff it inside a straw atheist.
        Atheist = God-hating, Satanist, Universalist, Nihilist

    • Bob Seidensticker


      Your problem is that you are merely asserting that the atheist peak is highest.

      I have on occasion argued that the atheist position is the correct one, but that’s not the point of this post. Maybe you’re confusing it with another one.

      Considering your utter lack of curiosity about the other peaks

      Golly … it’s like you can read my mind! How do you do that?

      it’s beyond ridiculous that you aren’t even interested in PHILOSOPHY

      I’ve been tainted. It’s not my fault! I get caustic philosophy from apologists, so it’s no wonder that I have an aversion. And why even bring up this tangent? Why is philosophy necessary here?

      and you claim to have explored all the mountains of rationality and intellect.


  • http://quinesqueue.blogspot.com Quine

    It depends quite a bit on how you visualize that landscape. I would start with a flat plane and have it stick up at places of testable truth, flat everywhere that might be true or might not be true and with deep drops below for things that can be shown to be false. For example, if your religion requires you to believe a literal six day Creation, that is a big hole. At the same time, if you are an atheist, but don’t think we had a common ancestor with the other apes, you are also in a hole. To the extent you hold true what can be shown to be backed by objective evidence, you are standing on higher ground.

    I tend to go with something Thomas Jefferson said, “He is closer to the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.”

    • Bob Seidensticker

      Quine: Interesting ideas. Clearly this surface metaphor can apply in many areas–I wish I’d thought to apply it this way first!

  • http://industrialblog.powerblogs.com IB Bill

    I can’t give you a purely intellectual trail of logic to follow to Christianity. No one can. I can get you to — belief in a higher intelligence is a very reasonable and rational conclusion to make. I would even argue it’s by far more likely and far more reasonable conclusion than “the universe is a big accident and so is any life that’s in it.” Any logical system can be either complete or consistent — it needs to point to something outside of itself. Nature/evolution, etc., does not explain itself.

    But the nature, actions and status of that higher intelligence, well, that’s a different story altogether.

    The modernist view is that myths are models of reality, but not literally true and don’t need to be. (Hence, Ulysses, but that’s off point. Also off point for the time being is the postmodernist critique of modernism.) Thus, you can sort of look at the various models that religious systems provide and decide which one best fits with your own observations, or if any one fits with your own observations about reality. When thinking along these lines, you’re making an aesthetic decision. The rituals, the traditions, the beliefs — these are not literally true, but are a sort of accumulated social wisdom that perhaps couldn’t be expressed any other way, and if they fit our human experience, give us a language to establish standards that we’d have trouble establishing any other way.

    Bob has decided that no religious model really fits. I think the atheistic model — that there is no higher intelligence — is open to the same criticisms that atheists use on religions. Until I see the same skepticism applied to religions applied to one’s own perceptions (particularly the part that your brain is just a machine) and atheistic worldview, sorry, I’m not going to take it seriously.

    In terms of what religions best reflect our human experience — that’s an interesting question. I must admit, that when I go down this entirely modernist line of thinking, I select a priori standards that I judge religions against. (I can justify these standards after the fact, but my point is that I already selected them intuitively and then used reason to justify them.) These standards include justice for the poor, the weak and the defenseless, hearing the cry of the widow and the orphan, the intrinsic dignity of every individual no matter what, that every person has civic duties, justice tempered with mercy, equal application of the rule of law regardless of social status, monogamous marriage and sexual virtue, that people should love their neighbor as themselves, that the economy is for man and not man for the economy, and that the highest virtue is sacrificial love in situations requiring extreme fortitude.

    Mohammed was a warlord who took vengeance on his enemies, and that knocks out Islam. It teaches God as master, not God as father, and that it’s right because Allah said so. He’s arbitrary.

    Buddhism — and I studied and practiced Buddhism for three years — is in fact quite wonderful, but in my humble opinion, doesn’t properly account for love and social freedom. Hinduism, which I also studied and practiced in learning meditation and massage, has some truths to it (the stuff they say would happen, happens). But it struggles with social freedom and superstition.

    Most primitivist religions struggle with gods and demons who must be appeased and seem to lock people’s minds into permanent superstition, tribalism and oppression. The best ancient paganism could do was stoicism and had problems with the inherent dignity of the individual.

    Those who use a modernist “model based” interpretation of mainstream religions still have to deal with the fact that they don’t really believe it.

    Atheists have to deal with the fact that they believe they are meat machines in a cold, unthinking, often hostile universe in which they hit the lottery big time, and that the only dignity that they’re going to get is that which we agree upon in social contracts. It’s not inherent, and thus can be taken away, usually by the ignorant, the stupid, the strong, and the power mad.

    There are only two religions that IMHO remotely fit my a priori standards — Christianity and Judaism. God is reasonable, God made you, God loves, you are not alone, you are not forgotten, and you are not unloved, even though you have a nature oriented toward pride and sin and act against the testimony of your own God-given conscience. And it’s not unnoticed how many atheists try to steal the virtues they like from our belief system that they can’t justify in their own belief system.

    • Bob Seidensticker


      Until I see the same skepticism applied to religions applied to one’s own perceptions

      Atheists have a religious presupposition about their own beliefs and refuse to critique them? We must hang out around different atheists.

      These standards include justice for the poor, the weak and the defenseless…

      Does “and it’s true” enter in to your criteria?

      Mohammed was a warlord who took vengeance on his enemies, and that knocks out Islam.

      Mohammed was a jerk, so therefore Allah doesn’t exist? I’m not sure I see how that follows. Or is the truth of the religion not a factor?

      Atheists have to deal with the fact that they believe they are meat machines …

      It’s as if the pleasantness of a claim has any bearing on its truth value. Can this be what you’re saying? That atheism is unpleasant so therefore it’s untrue?

      And most atheists would happily disagree with you about your discouraging appraisal.

      God is reasonable …

      Wait … which god are we talking about? I thought you said the Christian/Jewish god. That guy is not especially reasonable. You have read the OT, haven’t you?

      it’s not unnoticed how many atheists try to steal the virtues they like from our belief system that they can’t justify in their own belief system.

      Oh? Christianity invented “thou shalt not kill” and “treat your neighbor as yourself”?

      That’s news to me.

    • Jason

      IB Bill:
      I don’t agree with you but I think your response is one of the more reasonable ones that challenges atheism. However, I think you revealed one really important piece of info that undermines some of your claims. You admitted that you have a priori beliefs that you then compare to various religions or worldviews to determine which one is the most reasonable. I agree that this is the case for most people and many religious people are unwilling to admit this. So I appreciate that you did (really!). But what about your last statement:

      “And it’s not unnoticed how many atheists try to steal the virtues they like from our belief system that they can’t justify in their own belief system.”

      If you can recognize virtues a priori and then look around for religious traditions that conform to them, then is it also possible for an atheist to steal them? In other words, your comment about a priori values suggests that as humans we have innate ideas about virtue, ethics, etc (even if we don’t agree on all of them). So why is it that you need a religion to confirm the values you already know you believe? Why do you need Christianity or Judaism to confirm for you that you should love your neighbor as yourself, etc, if you already know it? I don’t think the atheists are stealing values. I think they are simply embracing the ones that seem self-evident to them without taking the extra step you described of looking for a religion that confirms them.

    • J-Rex

      I would even argue it’s by far more likely and far more reasonable conclusion than “the universe is a big accident and so is any life that’s in it.”

      This is a very important point that people seem to overlook when talking about atheism. Atheists accept the world as they see it and as it can be understood by science. We don’t believe in a god, but that doesn’t force us to come to any conclusion about the origin of the universe. We believe in the Big Bang, but we don’t know what happened before it because science has no way of answering that question yet (maybe not ever). So…we don’t know. We don’t know why there is something instead of nothing. But neither do you because even if there was a god to create it, you still don’t know why there is a god instead of nothing.

      Atheists have to deal with the fact that they believe they are meat machines in a cold, unthinking, often hostile universe in which they hit the lottery big time

      I wouldn’t call existence hitting the lottery. There are millions who would have been better off if they had never existed. I believe that as a result of the existence of the universe (because I don’t presume to know of anything that came before that), life emerged and changed over time and that some of that life does well and other life does not. Some people suffer immensely and others do just fine. I find that way easier to believe than to believe that an all-loving God created people knowing that they would suffer.
      There’s just no way for me to justify that, even as a Christian desperately trying to justify it. I would tell myself that it’s okay because people go to heaven in the end and experience endless bliss. But if they never existed, they would never miss out on the happiness, so there’s no problem there. But they had to experience pain and suffering, not to mention the people who end up suffering eternally in hell. Why create them in the first place? That’s just sickening to me. You may think that life is pointless as an atheist, but I think life is horribly depressing as a Christian. If the universe is random, so be it, I’ll make the most of it. If the universe was created by a god who created people to suffer just so they could spend eternity in heaven praising him or eternity in hell for not having the evidence to believe, then I don’t want to worship that god.

    • Baal

      I kind of want an atheist / rationalist dogma.
      Here’s the start of the commandments:
      1. Objective Reality exists, get over it. Corollary: Supernatural, by definition, doesn’t exit
      2. Science is the best (indeed, only) way to understand reality. Corollary, you did science (maybe poorly, maybe with out enough data) to believe what you do.
      3. There is a floor on morality – Anyone who spends time thinking about how to be a good person winds up more or less at consequential- ism (or vaguely humanistic ideas). This is possible to do starting at “I don’t want harm to me and absent a good reason, i don’t want to harm you” as your basis.
      4. There is a higher up to reach for. – Happiness for human beings has some rather specific requirements that happiness researchers have pinned down (google it, it’s also a therapy modality for depression, go figure); let’s work on making folks happy.

      So what’s missing? God and supernaturalism mostly. I reject that they are necessary and all too frequently religions do harm (go read the friendly atheist for a week for examples, any week will do). This dogma is hardly theft of xtian ideas on virtue. So far as i’ve outlined it, xtian values are somewhat at odds with this naturalistic maximal flourishing I’m suggesting.

  • http://blog.noctua.org.uk/ Paul Wright

    I’d disagree with the claim that Richard Morgan was at the top of Mount Atheism, having discussed things with him on the Premier Christian Radio forums (after his conversion).

    He used to link to his blog posts (like http://therepentantgene.blogspot.hu/2009/05/dear-reader-after-having-been.html) as if they indicated problems with the view that humans evolved or some problem with atheism or with Dawkins or something (it’s not very clear). I’m not a biologist, but even I could tell his views of evolution and of Dawkins was badly wrong).

    • Bob Seidensticker

      That’s helpful, thanks. I know nothing about Morgan except what he said in his two interviews, so I just took him at his word that he was well-versed in all arguments pro and con atheism. Perhaps not.

      • DrewL

        How could we have doubted. No atheist TRUELY versed in arguments pro and con would ever convert….

  • Jason

    I’m sure that some will find your hypothesis arrogant, but I think your basic point is absolutely right. Once people have good information than can be backed up, it’s hard to abandon it for something with less evidence (even though the occasional atheist decides that evidence and reason don’t matter as much as they thought and they teleport themselves off of it). But allow me to throw a monkey wrench in your hypothesis and metaphor: Some mountains, even though they might not be the highest, have a better view. For example, I am a biblical scholar and for all practical purposes an atheist, which I guess makes me one of the type one well informed atheists (I understand the history of the Bible, Christian apologetics, and a I have an enthusiastic but amateur understanding of evolution, etc). However, I have never personally identified with the atheist movement for various reasons, and I am a practicing Buddhist. I suppose one can be both an atheist and a Buddhist quite easily, but my point is that I don’t identify with the movement, and at the risk of pushing your metaphor too far, don’t stand on the atheist mountain. I should also point out that I’m not some kind of new age Buddhist who uses science to support metaphysical realities and that sort of thing. I’ve been on the atheist mountain, I like it there and enjoyed the view, but it’s not where I live.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      Buddhism as a philosophy? Sure, that sounds compatible with atheism. But then I don’t think there’s a mountain labeled “Buddhism” in this space.

      That’s sort of like saying that you’re passionate about being a great doctor and spend all your time doing doctor stuff, but in Belief/Reality space, “Doctor” isn’t on there.

      • Jason

        I think that one could call Buddhism a philosophy or a religion, depending on the person and the approach they take. I really don’t want to abuse the mountain metaphor, but if Buddhism doesn’t belong since it’s a philosophy, then why does atheism belong? Surely you don’t consider it a religion? But maybe you don’t consider it a philosophy either? I took the mountain metaphor to refer to worldviews more generally (which can be shaped by philosophies, religions, and other things). The mountain you are on determines how you see the world. This question of what atheism is (a worldview, a religion, a philosophy, the lack of other worldviews?) is something I would be interested in seeing a post on at some point. Perhaps you have already addressed it elsewhere.

        • Bob Seidensticker

          Atheism belongs because it’s a worldview on the subject of religion. That’s what I’m trying to constrain this surface to represent. (But someone more eloquent than me could do a better job of clarifying what’s in and what’s out.)

  • Matthew


    So you have no examples of rational arguments that have convinced an atheist? Even after I invited you to offer your own definition of “rational” and thus escape what you consider to be circular reasoning and unfalsifiable beliefs?

    That’s about what I thought and why I pressed you for specifics. It would have been faster to merely admit you had nothing.

    • joeclark77

      1. The universe is finite. Time and space have a specific beginning. Therefore it was created by someone or something outside of it. (This is why atheists and agnostics like Einstein panicked when they heard about the Big Bang theory: they knew that atheism required an infinite and eternal universe.)
      2. The universe is (a) rational and (b) purposeful and (c) non-random. (See the book “Privileged Planet” for one argument to this effect.) Therefore we can infer rationality and purpose in the Creator.
      3. Human beings are distinguished from other species by supernatural gifts (e.g. rationality, free will, conscience). Therefore our Creator (or at least, some other being outside of time and space?) has some special interest or purpose for us.
      4. Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, performed numerous public miracles, died and was raised from the dead on the third day. This is known to us because it was attested to by hundreds of eyewitnesses of all different social stations, including several whose names and biographies we know, most of whom went on to spread the message of what they had seen at the cost of being killed for it. The implausibility of any hypothetical conspiracy theory confirms that their testimony is true. (See “Testimony of the Evangelists” by Greenleaf: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testimony_of_the_Evangelist)
      4.5. As an aside, there have also been thousands (at least) of private revelations adding to the evidence that Christianity is true revelation from our Creator. Some of them are supported by an undeniable preponderance of evidence, such as Fatima.
      5. Because we know that Jesus Christ is God, and know that he is truthful, we can believe his teachings. Among these teachings are that the Catholic Church would be guided by the Holy Spirit and prevented from teaching error. It follows from this fact that the Bible (73 books, old and new testaments) is true, and that the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) is true.

      PS: Only points #4 and #5 are needed to confirm that Christianity is the truth.

      • Bob Seidensticker

        JC: I appreciate your thorough discussion, but I have a few issues.

        1. The universe is finite.

        The known universe is finite. There may be more to existence than just our universe.

        Therefore it was created by someone or something outside of it.

        You’re jumping the gun. When an electron flies out of the nucleus of an atom undergoing radioactive decay, there was no Creator that created it, and no cause that caused it. It was causeless.

        atheists and agnostics like Einstein panicked when they heard about the Big Bang theory

        Makes sense. Atheists like Einstein have an aversion to following the facts where they point, right? It’s a flippin’ miracle that we have any science at all because scientists refuse to follow the facts. (Miracle? Yet more proof of God! :) )

        they knew that atheism required an infinite and eternal universe

        Guess again.

        The universe is (a) rational and (b) purposeful and (c) non-random.

        Not quite sure what this means. I make it a point never to get my science from Privileged Planet. It’s kind of a religious requirement for me–sorry.

        Human beings are distinguished from other species by supernatural gifts (e.g. rationality, free will, conscience).

        Why must these be supernatural??

        This is known to us because it was attested to by hundreds of eyewitnesses of all different social stations

        Oh, please. I’ve beat this argument silly here.

        including several whose names and biographies we know

        We don’t know who wrote the gospels. The chain of evidence back to the resurrection is insanely flimsy. (Discussed in detail here.)

        went on to spread the message of what they had seen at the cost of being killed for it

        Die for a lie? Refuted here.

        The implausibility of any hypothetical conspiracy theory confirms that their testimony is true.

        No, the plausibility that this is just a story confirms that the “testimony” is a story.

        • joeclark77

          So you have replied with (a) ignorance of philosophy, (b) unwillingness to read a book because the authors reach a conclusion that you don’t like, (c) dismissal of arguments you can’t beat by making up unlikely and entirely speculative conspiracy theories.

          Leaving that aside for a minute, I think you must nevertheless agree that I’ve provided an intellectual path from atheism to Catholicism. You may not agree with my methodology of (a) figuring out what arguments mean, (b) reading books, and (c) judging the evidence as a fair-minded and rational thinker; but you surely cannot claim that this is an “irrational” path. Q.E.D. one can convert from atheism through the use of reason and evidence.

        • Bob Seidensticker


          So you have replied with (a) ignorance of philosophy,

          If you say so.

          (b) unwillingness to read a book because the authors reach a conclusion that you don’t like

          Wrong again. I’m very familiar with Creationism, though I haven’t read this particular book. I reject (nay–laugh) at this book because it rejects the scientific consensus.

          (c) dismissal of arguments you can’t beat by making up unlikely and entirely speculative conspiracy theories.


          you must nevertheless agree that I’ve provided an intellectual path from atheism to Catholicism.

          “Intellectual” in that it uses arguments, I suppose. They’re not good arguments, as I pointed out last time.

          (b) reading books, and (c) judging the evidence as a fair-minded and rational thinker

          Goodness no! Atheists are religiously bound to avoid reading books and to spin the evidence to fit their preconceptions. (But you already knew that.)

          Q.E.D. one can convert from atheism through the use of reason and evidence.

          Well … those arguments kinda have to stand up under scrutiny. Yours don’t.

        • joeclark77

          Did I say anything about creationism, apart from the obvious truth that the universe is created? You should check out the book, or if you won’t, stop asking for people to tell you which arguments convinced them that atheism was false.

        • Paul King

          I think the fact that you make clearly false claims (we have the testimony of hundreds of eyewitnesses to Jesus life ? Really ?) seriously undermines your claim to be “judging the evidence as a fair-minded and rational thinker”. It seems to me that your method is more “uncritically accepting the claims of Christian apologists”. And given the record of Christian apologists I hardly think that a rational person would regard that methodology as a good one for determining the truth.

        • Bob Seidensticker


          Did I say anything about creationism

          Is this a trick question? You gave Privileged Planet as an important source of science.

          apart from the obvious truth that the universe is created?

          Not obvious to me. Enlighten us.

          You should check out the book

          So I’m already well-versed in Creationism, but because I haven’t read your favorite account of it, I’m back at Square 1?

          Let me try this again: evolution is the scientific consensus. I’m not a biologist. I think I’ll accept the consensus view within biology. (Sound pretty reasonable?)

          stop asking for people to tell you which arguments convinced them that atheism was false.

          I’m not sure that I ever did, though I am interested in hearing your answer to this question. I’m pretty certain that the torrent of demands for arguments isn’t coming from me.

          And it is interesting that you’ve not followed up on the links I gave that (I claim) refuted your arguments. What do you think–do they carry the day?

        • joeclark77

          I repeat that I’ve said nothing about “creationism”, nor am I at all interested in “evolution” (and I do not think civilized people should use weasel words in the first place).

          The book I refer you to does a couple of things. First is an argument about the so-called Copernican principle (which has nothing to do with Copernicus) and why it can explain certain coincidences about our planet but not those about the universe. This is philosophical argument. The second thing is that it presents evidence for other coincidences that cannot be explained by any such principle. Among these are an issue that has been identified as far back as Johannes Kepler, that the universe seems designed such that the conditions most suitable for life to emerge are also the conditions most suitable for discovery and measurement of the universe. If you read the book and can beat their arguments, let me know.

          On the last matter, yes, I followed up on the links. You propose a series of totally unsubstantiated conspiracy theories (about scheming copyists altering history) with no basis in evidence as excuses not to deal with serious arguments from the facts. I might as well argue against the existence of dinosaurs by suggesting that the history of paleontology was possibly fabricated by the Nixon administration and the evidence subsequently destroyed.

        • Bob Seidensticker


          I repeat that I’ve said nothing about “creationism”

          Maybe you’d better reread that book. Or is your point that Intelligent Design has absolutely nothing to do with Creationism?

          I do not think civilized people should use weasel words in the first place

          Biologists have no problem with “evolution.” Why should the rest of us?

          If you read the book and can beat their arguments, let me know.

          I’m not a biologist, and I accept the consensus view (evolution) as the best provisional explanation of the truth that layman like you or I have.

          Aiming that book at lay people is meaningless. If they have an argument, it’s biologists they should be trying to convince.

          You propose a series of totally unsubstantiated conspiracy theories (about scheming copyists altering history) with no basis in evidence as excuses not to deal with serious arguments from the facts.

          I was looking for something a little more point-by-point. “Oh, that argument is a joke” doesn’t make clear what, precisely, is wrong with it.

          Never mind.

  • DrewL

    That you are still asking for an example to counter Bob’s claim shows you aren’t understanding the problem of logical fallacies.

    • Jason

      I just want to point out the irony of you accusing someone of logical fallacy when you seem to want to use a revised definition of reason. I am in particular thinking of your faulty reasoning in numbers 4 an 5 above. There are also many claims of people being abducted aliens. Do you believe those and anything that gets reported on a widespread scale? Also, most other religions claims a traditional authority that comes from a divine source in some way. Are you really persuaded that Christianity is special because you think the ancient gospels are someone totally reliable historical documents. That is unbelievably unreasonable.

      • DrewL

        Jason, check the usernames. You’ve read a joeclark post and accredited it to me.

        • Kodie

          You mean ‘attributed’ or ‘credited’. Keep up!

        • Jason

          My apologies!

    • Matthew


      Yes logical fallacies exist. That they exist, does not mean Bob has committed one. How hard is this to understand?

      The reason I’m pressing you for an example is so that we can see if Bob actually commits a logical fallacy. Can you present an example of an atheist converting through rational arguments that Bob then rejects with No True Scotsman. At this point, he hasn’t. By the way, from the noises you’re making, it seems you wish to redefine rational to include belief in the supernatural. Is this what you’re hinting at?

      • DrewL

        Sorry, we’re going in circles here. I’ll again point you back to the Bob-Alice exchange on wikipedia: counter-examples are a waste of time when someone is committing a No True Scotsman fallacy.

        I don’t wish to redefine rational: I want someone here to DEFINE rational. J-Rex was hinting at some dimensions. Klodie seemed to define it as “an argument I find persuasive” which gets us away from the No True Scotsman fallacy but in turn makes Bob’s claim completely uninteresting. Bob himself seems to have silently retreated from “rational” to “intellectual,” which is still definition-less in the present discussion.

        • Kodie

          I think you just like being a hall monitor more than being in class.

        • DrewL

          No I just like good logic over bad logic. Particularly from people who go to “Reason Rallies.”

        • Kodie

          Why’d you mischaracterize me then? You want to get facts right then stop getting them wrong and shaping your impressions to fit your pre-formed opinions.

        • DrewL

          Did you provide a definition of rational? Please, point to where it is. I don’t intentionally try to mischaracterize people.

        • Kodie

          What’s wrong with you checking what you said?

        • Matthew

          Actually, we’re not going in circles, you’re just avoiding answering the question. You’re making an assertion, that Bob has committed a No True Scotsman, and refusing to back it up. That seems pretty straight forward.

          But don’t be so coy, provide us with your definition of “rational” that can include faith based arguments. Don’t make us argue your point for you.

        • DrewL

          I don’t actually believe “rational” has much of a definition anymore: Hume and Nietzsche took it down quite a few notches, and modern psychology and sociology pretty much destroyed the rest of it. So I’m dependent on you guys to define it because it’s not something I believe in (like a theological term you don’t believe in). It’s actually not a term most philosophers ever use, with the exception of Habermas, though he has shifted to be much more open to “rational” faith claims in the last decade.

          But let me clarify: I’m not attacking anyone else’s definition of rational or “intellectual.” I’m challenging the fact that no one wants to define it, and I’m interpreting that reluctance as a recognition that defining it would inhibit its very selectively-pliable definition and make Bob’s hypothesis empirically testable. The non-falsifiable hypotheses are much more fun, after all.

        • Bob Seidensticker

          The non-falsifiable hypotheses are much more fun, after all.

          Amen, brother! You won’t catch me providing actual evidence. Just too dangerous for my flimsy atheist arguments.

      • Baal

        This would all be much easier if there were many many examples of atheists converting to xtianity. We could then catalog the reasons and look for themes or consistent evidence. We do have a lot of cases going the other way.

        Turns out the reasons are varied but wind up as actual rational good arguments reasons. My personal fav is that you can under stand reality based on science. Another good reason is that religious beliefs are all over the map in ways that mirror geography and culture (as you’d expect for a belief).

  • Selah

    The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament ” shows ” and proclaims His handiwork.
    Psalm 19:1 . Also , Romans 1 :2o ,21. What more evidence do you need ?

    • Jason

      Sorry to intrude. Let’s assume you’re right (creation implies creator). Now how do you know which god did it?

    • Bob Seidensticker


      What more evidence do you need ?

      So an ancient book says it and that means it’s true? Or is it only a book that you like that gets to be “true”?

      There are lots of other ancient books of religion and wisdom out there. Do you accept them all?

  • Ted Seeber

    The sixth patriarch of Zen Buddhism arrived at a new monastery to spend the night. When he arrived, he found two monks arguing near a flagpole. The first monk said “It’s the flag that is moving”. The second monk said “No, it is the wind that is moving.” The Sixth Patriarch said “You are both wrong- it is your mind that is moving”.

    This is also what I think of comparing heights in young religions like atheism and Protestantism and Islam.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      You think that you get the same view of reality from each worldview? They’re all equally valid?

  • Ted Seeber

    I believe that the sets of God and not God are equivalent, and talking about the exact same set of phenomena. Thhat is why I encouraged praying the Litany of Tarski. The one thing you need to learn is how to be wrong and let other people be right.

    • Bob Seidensticker

      {God} = {not-God}? So God = { }?

      How the Litany of Tarski teaches one how to be wrong I’m missing. And I’m not sure why that’s relevant to this topic. (So I can see my error in this situation?)

  • Selah

    @ Jason
    I believe with all my heart and by faith ( Hebrews 11 :1-3 )that the God of Abraham , Isaac and Jacob is the creator of this universe.Jason , I hope you have access to a Bible, and if you do , I have some Old Testament scriptures that I also whole heartedly believe in. Deut: 32;39 ; 2 Sam:7:22 ;
    1Kings 8:23 ,2Chron:2:5 , Psalm 86:8, Isa:43:10 and finally John 17:3 ( * there are more but these
    should suffice).

    • Bob Seidensticker

      Selah: You write this as if it’s a magic spell. Doesn’t that give you pause?

      • Baal

        It also strikes me as a mental shibboleth.
        So far as Christianity or any other mental model isn’t well mapped to reality, our brains hit some cognitive dissonance at the mismatches. One way to solve the dissonance is to return mentally to safe places or ‘solid’ constructs. Here Christianity is quite strong (if inconsistent with reality); recitation of cites to an old book that could mean almost anything (and they do, especially as applied) works like mental spackle. Falling into a mismatch? no problem, whip out some verses w/o thinking how they apply or not, don’t apply them, just take them out and wave them around. The problem is now solved and your brain can return to homeostasis.

  • Matthew


    Your persistent inability to provide evidence to support your claims is noted.

    Nor is it surprising that you’ve descended into semantic obscurantism. Yes, the definition of rational can be debated. However, at the end of the day, we all need to resolve truth claims. If you don’t believe in rationality, I wonder how you can get along in the world. Do you accept all miraculous claims, or just those of your preferred religion?

  • DrewL

    Your argument is with post-Enlightenment philosophy, not me.

    But I’d be happy to hear your working definition of “rational,” or Bob’s or Kodie’s. I’ve shared my thoughts about a definition, as requested. I can’t say the same for anyone else here.

    • Kodie

      I think the overall problem is with the word “intellectual” not “rational.” I think joeclark makes an example of himself (and everyone else) very well here:

      You may not agree with my methodology of (a) figuring out what arguments mean, (b) reading books, and (c) judging the evidence as a fair-minded and rational thinker; but you surely cannot claim that this is an “irrational” path. Q.E.D. one can convert from atheism through the use of reason and evidence.

      I would call Joe’s path “intellectual,” as in he used whatever skills he believes himself to have to figure out what arguments were persuasive to him. They are not persuasive to me, however, and I would not call the path that he followed “rational” because “rational” means something else – hold off on it a sec.

      I do believe most everyone on the side of faith has arrived there by some intellectual means, as Joe describes. They had to go through some steps to question its truth and were shown whatever arguments they ultimately found convincing. Some people are tough, they think they’re pretty smart, and also believe some guy got himself executed 2000 years ago because he knows every single hair on your head. That makes no sense. Does everyone stare at that statement and understand how that seems preposterous? How could anyone believe that’s true without going through some other steps intellectually? If you couldn’t sort out claims everyone makes based on something, you would just believe everything. Some people are moved by a story or they prove it to themselves via prayer and vague “signs,” while others need a more scientific looking approach. All of those are using an intellectual process. If you were a dog, you are not running after a ball for no reason – it looks like your guy threw a ball. You believe a ball was thrown and you ran away from him to fetch it. Your senses tell you what might be true and you believe your senses are correct even if the evidence fails to be there.

      I also think no one on the side of belief arrived there by rational means. They may think they are pretty smart, but at some point made a logical leap to get there. Maybe they didn’t notice the leap, but that’s why we discuss these things. They think no bad argument could move them; they were moved; therefore it must be true. Does not follow logically. Atheism isn’t a religion, ok. It is the position one finds oneself in when no arguments for religion are persuasive enough to convince a person. How can so many of you deny evolution? How come so many of you don’t know what “evidence” means? How come so many of you believe in god when the arguments all have holes in them? The fact that you’re on the side of belief does not equate with following a logical path to get there, or a rational path. When you show me that path, you tell me to shift my attitude, to pray so I can hear the very quiet and particularly sensitive god, you don’t tell me – “HERE is god and it goes this way and then you do this and… see?” If I see, that doesn’t mean I’m rational either. All of those arguments have logical leaps. Sweeping generalizations, appeals to how smart you think you are, baseless assertions, cognitive biases, really nothing at all like EVIDENCE. A clear path from A to B with things that actually follow from the premise; a premise that is true and not just assumed so that the premises follow from it. If you make an assertion, you have to prove that it is true; you don’t gather clues and draw conclusions that don’t actually follow.

      In the example of Joe’s book for example – the author gathered observations and made a conclusion that there is a creator – that may seem intellectual but it doesn’t follow rationally. Obviously Joe thinks he’s smarter than everyone else, so if having been an atheist (he claims) prior to reading a book, he is moved by this one argument finally; and follows that it must therefore be true. I don’t know how “therefore, CATHOLICISM”. That’s a separate leap. I see 3 leaps in his argument and has yet to describe to me fully how every conclusion results necessarily from a premise. He may in turn think I’m stubborn – that I need an attitude shift. That’s another way of saying stop being so logical because it won’t work – it doesn’t make all the sense – it can’t be arrived at 100% rationally unless we relax all the rules about logic and evidence. At least that’s the impression I get from most theists – they want to change the rules instead of face facts. Yes, if you change all the rules to suit your conclusions, then you can’t really rule out all the other things that aren’t true either.

      I don’t necessarily agree with Bob’s statement either. I have a different impression what it means to be intellectual vs. rational. People self-assess their intellectual capacity usually pretty highly. A lot of active atheists are exposed to the arguments, but there’s no way to know how well they really understand logic either. Atheism is really more of an exposure to real things with evidence which tend to diminish the potential reality of supernatural things. It’s possible to be an atheist without any intellect whatsoever, and it’s possible to blend in without any critical thinking abilities. It’s always possible to believe you are smarter than the other guy, and smarter than average – every single forum I’ve ever been on the internet has a group of people who think they are ALL smarter than all the other people. Not possible and not even evident.

      There are going to be some arguments that persuade some self-assessed pretty intellectual atheists on some level to believe there may be a deity and not something they can describe rationally. No one ever has – just because someone is convinced doesn’t mean what they believe is rational.

  • DrewL

    Great thoughts Kodie, thank you for sharing.

    Three questions:
    1. Sounds like you’re professing a belief in logical positivism or evidentialism (wikipedia defines these things and lists criticisms.) What if someone’s rational journey of examining arguments and evidence leads him/her to reject these approaches to knowledge–do they immediately get thrown out of the “rational” camp, even if they got there on careful “rational” examination of arguments/evidence? Keep in mind nearly all secular philosophers today have made that rejection, but they hardly write books that appeal to whispery voices from a sensitive God.

    2. If you make an assertion, you have to prove that it is true; you don’t gather clues and draw conclusions that don’t actually follow.Is this true of all knowledge, or just some knowledge? Bob has recognized he doesn’t have “evidence” for his moral beliefs, for instance.

    3. Are all atheists necessarily “rational” atheists? Keep in mind the greatest predictor of being an atheist is certain demographic characteristics: born in an atheist household, white, educated, middle-class, 20-something, not married, not living in the south. (your profile pic suggests you might defy at least one of these characteristics, but of course we’re talking statistical probabilities here)

    • Matthew

      Ah Drew, at last were getting somewhere.

      I know you’d rather avoid explaining your beliefs plainly, but at least you’ve worked up a tiny bit of gumption. Now you’re brave enough to imply that rejecting evidence and finding different ways of knowing might be rational. Isn’t that rather New Age-y of you? I kinda figured you were heading this way but were afraid stating your beliefs outright would make you lose any credibility with other commentators.

      And yes, in a public debate, most of us feel the need to present evidence to back our assertions, least they be ignored as empty. I can’t speak for Bob, but most of us have a huge body of evidence for our moral beliefs. We understand how our actions effect others and how others effect us, we understand the importance of stable society and how certain shared morals contribute to that, and we can also observe that almost all societies, regardless of religious affiliation, share some basic moral guidelines. As social animals, humans do tend to follow a set of similiar rules to get along.

      As to your last point, atheism appears to be correlated with societal stability and affluence, some have linked it to education and intelligence. Religious beliefs, on the other hand, tend to be associated with less secure and poorer societies. Of course, the greatest predictor of religion is geography. There are not a lot of Catholics being born in Thailand.

      • DrewL

        Now you’re brave enough to imply that rejecting evidence and finding different ways of knowing might be rational. Isn’t that rather New Age-y of you?

        Here’s the wikipedia article on logical positivism:

        Until the 1950s, logical positivism was the leading school in the philosophy of science. Ultimately, it failed to solve many of the problems with which it was centrally concerned, and after the Second World War, its doctrines increasingly came under attack by thinkers such as Nelson Goodman, Willard Van Orman Quine, J. L. Austin, Peter Strawson, Hilary Putnam, and Richard Rorty.

        None of those figures are at all New Age-y. Neither am I.

        In addition,

        …By the late 1960s it became obvious that the movement had pretty much run its course.”Most philosophers consider logical positivism to be, as John Passmore expressed it, “dead, or as dead as a philosophical movement ever becomes.” By the late 1970s, its ideas were so generally recognized to be seriously defective that one of its own main proponents, A. J. Ayer, could say in an interview: “I suppose the most important [defect]…was that nearly all of it was false.”

        It’s not “brave” of me to challenge the tenants of logical positivism: it’s a dead philosophical movement. It’s actually brave of many new atheists to try resurrecting it. But I’m not accusing anyone here of doing that because no one here has provided a full-fledged definition of rationality. I’d love to see one articulated, however.

        • Matthew

          You claim you’re not New Age. Okay, I’ll accept that. However, since you steadfastly refuse to explain what you actually believe, a little misunderstanding is inevitable.

          Frankly, you seem to be playing a fairly transparent game of Philosophical God-of-the-Gaps; If you can create enough confusion then perhaps belief in the supernatural can somehow be on par with better evidenced beliefs. Somehow. Maybe. Or something…

    • Kodie

      1. Your favorite thing to do seems to be calling something what you think it is and then running with it regardless if it is true. You defined “No True Scotsman” at least a few times as if no one heard what you said or that no one ever heard of it before. Long story short, I don’t know what you’re after here either and I’m not even sure I should spend the effort to draw you a picture and see if that’s what you said it is or exactly the opposite of what you’re accusing me of. I’m not a philosophy scholar. Does that mean I always lose, that I’m always wrong? Or does it mean that you want to be right so badly that you achieve that by just making everyone tired. Well, everyone who is paying attention to you still, which would be me.

      2. That’s true for just about all knowledge. There is a lot we can all get by good enough without closing all the gaps all the time. That doesn’t mean it’s true, and there are some things that can’t be “true,” while still being real. Man, I’m so tired. I had this other long rambling post about statistics and the moon and my neck hurts on one side and my sinuses are pressing and my landlord hasn’t turned the heat on yet, so I feel a bit too impaired to respond with any kind of clarity. I know what I mean but I know even on my best days, I’m less articulate than I would like. I don’t know if I will get back to this or just let it come around again.

      3. No, not all atheists are rational atheists. That doesn’t mean they’re never rational or not really atheists, and I’m not sure if you’re trying to trap me, but that doesn’t mean no atheists are rational. Just like I would say some theists are pretty darn literate and some are just contentious idiots. Theism doesn’t reconcile with reality or there would be evidence that one of them is true. All of them are man-created and man-described and man-believed but not man-known for sure. Atheism is a concept only in relation to claims of theism. You say X with no proof and I don’t believe you. You say you have plenty of evidence and you don’t know why I’m not convinced, it’s not to spite you or to deny anything obvious. Is it because it’s not evidence? It isn’t. Nothing logically follows things that can’t be known. You can say “pepper makes me sneeze”. I say, I can believe that since it makes me sneeze too. Or that’s weird, pepper never makes me sneeze. Or what’s pepper? How are you defining pepper? I’ve heard of pepper but I belong to a strict no-spice religion. If something makes you sneeze, how can it be good for anything? I hate sneezing so I better not risk having it in the house. Or, it’s not actually the pepper that makes you sneeze, but the little hairs inside your nostril responding to stimulus, a change in air quality no matter the foreign substance. And you are like, there are no hairs in the nostril, pepper is a devil that tries to get in your brain through your nose and it’s the Jesus in your nose who scares it away. Suuuuuure. We’re going to take a little flashlight and point it up your nose and see? There’s no Jesus up there, little hairs. But you want to say how do you know he wasn’t there a second ago and left since there’s no pepper to scare away? I don’t know how to convince you. Pepper makes most people sneeze, but there’s no logical way to draw that back to Jesus, as every other argument about Jesus tries to make similarly, no matter how sophisticated.

      That’s pretty much all I got right now, so you try to work with that and your wikipedia instructions what I should do next.

      • DrewL

        You didn’t engage 1, but to be fair, I probably should have explained it more clearly.

        3 your answer is yes, that’s all I was interested in. Just curious.

        2 you leave a gap by saying it’s “true for just about all knowledge.” This means we probably need a theory to tell us what knowledge it IS true for and what theory it’s NOT true for. This is where this conversation breaks down generally because it’s difficult to “rationally” argue for what we do and do not need evidence for. I’ll leave it up to you to develop this more–perhaps resurrect the moon argument if you get to feeling better.

  • Pingback: hefalimp cardijon

  • Pingback: dryer cleaning houston

  • Pingback: cialis internet forum

  • Pingback: lidocaine for premature ejaculation

  • Pingback: online slot games

  • Pingback: cialis naturel

  • Pingback: free,

  • Pingback: music download

  • Pingback: dog bed

  • Pingback: how to get a guy to last longer in bed

  • Pingback: Look These Up

  • Pingback: commander cialis generique

  • Pingback: macarons kopen nederland

  • Pingback: how to last longer havingsex

  • Pingback: cialis a cosa serve

  • Pingback: payday loans online

  • Pingback: automotive

  • Pingback: arab goat sex

  • Pingback: Home Improvement

  • Pingback: good

  • Pingback: useful

  • Pingback: Continue reading

  • Pingback: reference

  • Pingback: headphonenetwork.com

  • Pingback: sysgration.info

  • Pingback: how to last longer during sex for men

  • Pingback: electroglasprober.info

  • Pingback: myfamilyexercise.info

  • Pingback: togel hari ini

  • Pingback: jetskitrailers.info

  • Pingback: districtvii.info

  • Pingback: cheap pinterest likes

  • Pingback: cialis occhi

  • Pingback: bitcoin casino

  • Pingback: mmpr licensed producers mmpr licensed producers

  • Pingback: youngleadersacademy.info

  • Pingback: lawyer directory

  • Pingback: buy youtube likes

  • Pingback: olie

  • Pingback: cfks.info

  • Pingback: elegantbeansandbeyond.info

  • Pingback: Home

  • Pingback: commander cialis discount

  • Pingback: Fashion

  • Pingback: tomturbo.info

  • Pingback: san antonio lawyer alexander begum

  • Pingback: Robert Shumake

  • Pingback: i loved

  • Pingback: New Songs List

  • Pingback: Optimax

  • Pingback: thai massage dublin

  • Pingback: seo training

  • Pingback: Paignton Driving School

  • Pingback: massage dublin

  • Pingback: Penis enlargement

  • Pingback: roz grammes

  • Pingback: Shaahin Cheyene

  • Pingback: natures comfort reviews

  • Pingback: terms of use

  • Pingback: kitchens

  • Pingback: document management

  • Pingback: hills home market complaints

  • Pingback: westwood college

  • Pingback: Kids & Teens

  • Pingback: kitchens

  • Pingback: privacy policy

  • Pingback: protectninow.info

  • Pingback: psychologist1.info

  • Pingback: Flight Tickets

  • Pingback: teenagemodelingagencies.info

  • Pingback: lagunanigueltriathlon.info

  • Pingback: Richard McArthur Realtor

  • Pingback: zakopane-cyrhla.info

  • Pingback: kitchen cupboards

  • Pingback: DIRTY ARMY

  • Pingback: Richard McArthur Realtor

  • Pingback: camilo concha

  • Pingback: Richard McArthur Silverton

  • Pingback: best wireless speakers

  • Pingback: ford raptor bumper

  • Pingback: cult

  • Pingback: electric bike motor

  • Pingback: Christian boarding schools

  • Pingback: brides of ukraine agency

  • Pingback: buy likes

  • Pingback: raleigh wedding videographer

  • Pingback: cialis comment ca marche

  • Pingback: health information

  • Pingback: garden

  • Pingback: job in usa

  • Pingback: business marketing

  • Pingback: amazing porn site

  • Pingback: sale

  • Pingback: web

  • Pingback: this site

  • Pingback: bay area garage door

  • Pingback: New Songs

  • Pingback: edward maldonado

  • Pingback: media partner

  • Pingback: Madden 15 eBooks

  • Pingback: love systems online dating

  • Pingback: travel destinations

  • Pingback: web development

  • Pingback: online dating and a formula for love

  • Pingback: Beauty

  • Pingback: dbz kai

  • Pingback: Real Estate

  • Pingback: Home Improvement

  • Pingback: bforex احتيال

  • Pingback: dbz games

  • Pingback: online betting offers

  • Pingback: Empower Network Scam

  • Pingback: Carey Martell

  • Pingback: blog

  • Pingback: technology

  • Pingback: metatron

  • Pingback: Ceiling Fan Installation

  • Pingback: Home Improvement

  • Pingback: Drywall Finishing

  • Pingback: Knockdown Texture

  • Pingback: Illinois Process Servers

  • Pingback: cheapest shakeology

  • Pingback: youtube mp4

  • Pingback: Northern Virginia dryer vent cleaning

  • Pingback: site nasil kurulur

  • Pingback: In Depth Review Of Remarkamobile

  • Pingback: detox

  • Pingback: media

  • Pingback: Best online auction sites

  • Pingback: traffic lawyers los angeles

  • Pingback: renta de autos en cancun

  • Pingback: Arlington VA dryer vent cleaning Wizard

  • Pingback: ganesh chaturthi songs

  • Pingback: renta de autos en cancun

  • Pingback: renta de autos en cancun

  • Pingback: vorzeitiger samenerguss

  • Pingback: my site

  • Pingback: webmaster

  • Pingback: mazda customer service

  • Pingback: huyundai

  • Pingback: maths tutor pune mumbai

  • Pingback: my blogs

  • Pingback: website

  • Pingback: info

  • Pingback: Jasa Add Follower

  • Pingback: fish oil capsules

  • Pingback: urniary cancer cells caues include diabetis medicine

  • Pingback: website

  • Pingback: website

  • Pingback: Medicines Online

  • Pingback: making candles at home

  • Pingback: slip and fall cases

  • Pingback: coupon

  • Pingback: source website

  • Pingback: sell my own property

  • Pingback: resources

  • Pingback: Service of Process Illinois

  • Pingback: my blogs

  • Pingback: m88

  • Pingback: in here

  • Pingback: AARON KOCOUREK

  • Pingback: online pharmacy

  • Pingback: Annamaria Stika

  • Pingback: blog

  • Pingback: Virus

  • Pingback: android apps

  • Pingback: facial moisturizer

  • Pingback: website

  • Pingback: ion blend competing tires

  • Pingback: money horoscope

  • Pingback: Betboo

  • Pingback: getting a home loan

  • Pingback: cialis francais

  • Pingback: tadalafil ipertensione

  • Pingback: Squirrel Removal Katy

  • Pingback: bitcoin casino

  • Pingback: my site

  • Pingback: jam casio murah

  • Pingback: my blogs

  • Pingback: webmaster

  • Pingback: homes for sale

  • Pingback: making money on twitter

  • Pingback: Warren

  • Pingback: my site

  • Pingback: in here

  • Pingback: West Bloomfield

  • Pingback: source website

  • Pingback: bee wild pest control

  • Pingback: appliance repair near Yonkers NY

  • Pingback: appliance repair Bronx

  • Pingback: Garcinia Cambogia Supreme

  • Pingback: best vitamins for hair growth

  • Pingback: Cialis

  • Pingback: recover deleted files mac

  • Pingback: resources

  • Pingback: Essential Oils

  • Pingback: easy ways to last longer in bed

  • Pingback: trash recovery mac

  • Pingback: info

  • Pingback: mobile number databases

  • Pingback: Avondale appliance repair

  • Pingback: Games and softwares free download

  • Pingback: appliance repair Mesa

  • Pingback: appliance repair Glendale

  • Pingback: House eviction

  • Pingback: banking

  • Pingback: Baltasar sanchez haz

  • Pingback: viagra online

  • Pingback: hydrocodone online

  • Pingback: adderall without prescription

  • Pingback: hydrocodone online

  • Pingback: tramadol without prescription

  • Pingback: viagra online

  • Pingback: money

  • Pingback: free slot machines for fun games

  • Pingback: cheerleading

  • Pingback: izmir escort

  • Pingback: videos de putas

  • Pingback: used and new cars for sale

  • Pingback: cracked seo tools

  • Pingback: sinema izle

  • Pingback: free pet food samples

  • Pingback: used cars in dubai

  • Pingback: dalaman transfers

  • Pingback: Glass Replacement in Tempe

  • Pingback: wisetrail.com

  • Pingback: NHL

  • Pingback: bisuteria online

  • Pingback: More Bonuses

  • Pingback: caramoan package

  • Pingback: cheap viagra

  • Pingback: click here

  • Pingback: Pest Control Houston Texas

  • Pingback: Live sex

  • Pingback: free MOL account

  • Pingback: Exterminator Service Houston Texas

  • Pingback: FanDuel Promo Code

  • Pingback: facial mask

  • Pingback: teen chat

  • Pingback: badmintonschläger test

  • Pingback: experience gifts for men

  • Pingback: free slots to play for fun

  • Pingback: Gheata Carbonica

  • Pingback: online drugstore

  • Pingback: payday loans

  • Pingback: sunroom alexandria

  • Pingback: suboxone detox forum

  • Pingback: esporradela facial

  • Pingback: arlington sunroom

  • Pingback: largo sunroom

  • Pingback: nether hacks

  • Pingback: centreville sunroom

  • Pingback: buying wine online

  • Pingback: macchina fotografica reflex prezzi pazzi

  • Pingback: leather leggings

  • Pingback: buy tramadol

  • Pingback: sunroom springfield

  • Pingback: buy adipex

  • Pingback: code promo

  • Pingback: sunroom germantown

  • Pingback: buy ambien

  • Pingback: cialis

  • Pingback: sex

  • Pingback: Sports

  • Pingback: cialis chanson

  • Pingback: 6http://www.rusload.de/uprofile.php?UID=240178

  • Pingback: best home security

  • Pingback: comment devenir riche

  • Pingback: viagra

  • Pingback: Designer wallet

  • Pingback: bug out bag list

  • Pingback: backtrack wallpaper

  • Pingback: join the illuminati

  • Pingback: Aspergers Quiz

  • Pingback: Aspergers

  • Pingback: banana blue

  • Pingback: payday loans

  • Pingback: digital marketing company

  • Pingback: Aspergers Quiz

  • Pingback: Toronto Criminal Lawyer

  • Pingback: Cialis

  • Pingback: phone armor iphone 5c

  • Pingback: cerrajeros 24 horas murcia

  • Pingback: Click Here

  • Pingback: Tea party

  • Pingback: hecigarette review

  • Pingback: cerebral palsy disability treatment

  • Pingback: Viagra

  • Pingback: property financing

  • Pingback: arkitekter

  • Pingback: trail gear

  • Pingback: viagra

  • Pingback: sex landscaper

  • Pingback: agen bolatangkas

  • Pingback: real soundcloud plays

  • Pingback: Pomsky

  • Pingback: Oregon Social Security Disability

  • Pingback: bajar de peso alcachofa de laon

  • Pingback: Learn Hacking Tutorials

  • Pingback: Elizabeth Hapner

  • Pingback: cupon peru

  • Pingback: zidalo

  • Pingback: hearthstone arena guide

  • Pingback: click here

  • Pingback: sehack

  • Pingback: Chromebox

  • Pingback: essential oils for babies

  • Pingback: odzywki na rzezbe

  • Pingback: podpis elektroniczny

  • Pingback: penis extender

  • Pingback: noticias ivan bedia

  • Pingback: viral videos

  • Pingback: zespól muzyczny wroclaw

  • Pingback: free porn

  • Pingback: Gulf Shores Vacation Rentals

  • Pingback: Anonymous

  • Pingback: Asian escorts London

  • Pingback: arkitekter kobenhavn

  • Pingback: ????? ????

  • Pingback: construction clean up

  • Pingback: tuppersex

  • Pingback: garden shed plans

  • Pingback: make money

  • Pingback: stopthestresstoday.com/about-me

  • Pingback: iPhone 6

  • Pingback: Livejasmin Hack download free

  • Pingback: our website

  • Pingback: Find the Best

  • Pingback: blowjob

  • Pingback: bolatangkasnet

  • Pingback: Miami Limo

  • Pingback: Roaches for sale

  • Pingback: cera topaz cs 701a

  • Pingback: toy schnauzer puppies for sale

  • Pingback: Newport Beach

  • Pingback: online flashcards

  • Pingback: seo uk

  • Pingback: vince stanzione

  • Pingback: hire movers

  • Pingback: filtros de agua

  • Pingback: how to trade binary options

  • Pingback: betboo

  • Pingback: House Cleaning Sydney

  • Pingback: bahis siteleri

  • Pingback: zryxhl

  • Pingback: Mobile app

  • Pingback: betboo

  • Pingback: web design dallas

  • Pingback: betboo

  • Pingback: betboo

  • Pingback: betboo

  • Pingback: Jogos de carros

  • Pingback: chelsea porn calander,

  • Pingback: بفركس نصب

  • Pingback: turf newcastle

  • Pingback: Zebra Printer Repair

  • Pingback: outsourced online

  • Pingback: Aprender idiomas en linea

  • Pingback: cheap viagra

  • Pingback: Bursa Evden eve Nakliyat

  • Pingback: Alarme maison

  • Pingback: locksmith in Ann Arbor

  • Pingback: ganool

  • Pingback: laser diodes

  • Pingback: website

  • Pingback: flying homes

  • Pingback: twitter application

  • Pingback: scam reviews

  • Pingback: borra caves

  • Pingback: fifa 15 ultimate team coins

  • Pingback: Ricker Construction - Snow Removal and Excavation Services in Harrisburg PA

  • Pingback: this page

  • Pingback: Joe Pojman

  • Pingback: precosse

  • Pingback: ripoff report

  • Pingback: Live video game

  • Pingback: Mogul PR

  • Pingback: retarder lejaculation

  • Pingback: ogrzewanie

  • Pingback: retarder lejaculation

  • Pingback: télécharger films gratuit

  • Pingback: egg white

  • Pingback: food and drink

  • Pingback: gsmnet

  • Pingback: IT Courses

  • Pingback: Read This

  • Pingback: Travel

  • Pingback: nina ricci

  • Pingback: epic fails

  • Pingback: list of registered domain names

  • Pingback: Pressplay App

  • Pingback: Jill Starchman

  • Pingback: Preston Byrd

  • Pingback: Preston Byrd speaker

  • Pingback: Wirral airport service

  • Pingback: Preston Byrd speaker

  • Pingback: Cameo Brooch

  • Pingback: Dainik Destiny

  • Pingback: Online Data Entry Jobs Can Earn Extra Cash

  • Pingback: Condensateketel premies

  • Pingback: webhotel gratis

  • Pingback: seattle web design

  • Pingback: school

  • Pingback: probitus

  • Pingback: language tutors London

  • Pingback: Very Strong Family 3 - Alliv da nanz (Sigla finale)

  • Pingback: Building a Christ Centered Marriage:

  • Pingback: Bryon Lofton

  • Pingback: The Luxury Spot

  • Pingback: Online shopping

  • Pingback: viagra

  • Pingback: fake review

  • Pingback: ganar dinero por internet

  • Pingback: funko toys

  • Pingback: travel mask

  • Pingback: play online slots

  • Pingback: RCC Institute of Technology Review

  • Pingback: top sport supplements

  • Pingback: digital signage kiosk enclosure

  • Pingback: Phoenix Barter Company

  • Pingback: mlm scheme

  • Pingback: home loan singapore

  • Pingback: vimax

  • Pingback: Free Make up

  • Pingback: preschool lesson plans

  • Pingback: how to get rid of bed bugs

  • Pingback: Cute Dress For Girls

  • Pingback: atms for events

  • Pingback: istanbul evden eve

  • Pingback: online flashcards

  • Pingback: http://istanbulescortc.com

  • Pingback: Nigerian Music

  • Pingback: awareness network

  • Pingback: ofertas peru

  • Pingback: Bose Calgary

  • Pingback: koszulki reklamowe

  • Pingback: work from home

  • Pingback: http://pixelbendershader.com

  • Pingback: Tiffanie Craddock

  • Pingback: Alaska AK Fiat Dealers

  • Pingback: mind power

  • Pingback: http://ritadavidson.com

  • Pingback: wordpress theme free

  • Pingback: witryna www

  • Pingback: marketing platform

  • Pingback: http://ritadavidson.net

  • Pingback: jns

  • Pingback: Celebrity Movies

  • Pingback: Tacori

  • Pingback: cbd cannabis oil

  • Pingback: molotov mitchell

  • Pingback: unlock cellular

  • Pingback: unlock iphone

  • Pingback: kangen water machine

  • Pingback: binary options trading software

  • Pingback: windykacja naleznosci warszawa

  • Pingback: slizgacze

  • Pingback: maturazeitung

  • Pingback: sell house fast

  • Pingback: restaurants in yarm

  • Pingback: DIY

  • Pingback: simply essentials tweezers for ingrown hair

  • Pingback: ambien online

  • Pingback: viagra online

  • Pingback: valium online

  • Pingback: in here

  • Pingback: Christmas Lights

  • Pingback: resource

  • Pingback: here source

  • Pingback: blog

  • Pingback: cheap website traffic

  • Pingback: Remarkamobile Login

  • Pingback: paydayloansukalh.co.uk

  • Pingback: online shopping

  • Pingback: renta de autos en cancun

  • Pingback: lawsuits xarelto

  • Pingback: blog

  • Pingback: great business

  • Pingback: source

  • Pingback: Anonymous

  • Pingback: Waar studeren

  • Pingback: Juegos educativos

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

  • Pingback: online dating lesbian

  • Pingback: WebForum

  • Pingback: rinnai tankless water heaters

  • Pingback: RJ Palano

  • Pingback: hotel

  • Pingback: Computer Monitoring Software

  • Pingback: Click Here

  • Pingback: Sohbeto Dalariniz

  • Pingback: Geed Kanolosha

  • Pingback: windturbine

  • Pingback: Global Marketing Group

  • Pingback: azulvilla nieruchomości hiszpania

  • Pingback: Save My Nature

  • Pingback: Kosher auditing China

  • Pingback: Tens Handheld Electronic Pulse Massager Unit

  • Pingback: SEO

  • Pingback: Child Abuse

  • Pingback: just the facts jack

  • Pingback: tutaj

  • Pingback: signature creater

  • Pingback: Debt

  • Pingback: Brautmoden

  • Pingback: Polaris RZR Parts

  • Pingback: Hatem Elhagely

  • Pingback: Igrovoy Best

  • Pingback: click here

  • Pingback: http://webcancun.net

  • Pingback: georgetown newspaper

  • Pingback: Greenpoint Solar

  • Pingback: home instead reviews

  • Pingback: Synergy Boiler

  • Pingback: Ausgezeichnet Geniessen

  • Pingback: acorn stairlifts

  • Pingback: Anonymous

  • Pingback: cheap menu printing

  • Pingback: Moderate Party

  • Pingback: Zahnarzt Ludwigsburg - Dr. Jacobi-Haumer Expertin für Implantologie

  • Pingback: online sports betting

  • Pingback: cialis online pharmacy

  • Pingback: Ru And You

  • Pingback: Dating Love

  • Pingback: süperbahis

  • Pingback: blog

  • Pingback: Charm Bracelet Project

  • Pingback: our site

  • Pingback: diets that work

  • Pingback: Taxi to Gatwick

  • Pingback: limo Calgary

  • Pingback: Mayday Games

  • Pingback: Charm Bracelet Project

  • Pingback: Mayday Games

  • Pingback: auto mobile code reviews

  • Pingback: http://www.bypassicloudlock.net/

  • Pingback: click here

  • Pingback: our site

  • Pingback: schlüsseldienst düsseldorf

  • Pingback: luigi wewege

  • Pingback: Blechercollins

  • Pingback: Charm Bracelet Project

  • Pingback: spy camera pix

  • Pingback: http://cityabode.com

  • Pingback: How to talk to women

  • Pingback: spy camera pix

  • Pingback: soul beats for sale

  • Pingback: Charm Bracelet Project

  • Pingback: www.fotosidan.se/stolengear/

  • Pingback: Charm Bracelet Project

  • Pingback: Charm Bracelet Project

  • Pingback: Blechercollins

  • Pingback: industrial stencils

  • Pingback: my blogs

  • Pingback: my blogs

  • Pingback: Charm Bracelet Project

  • Pingback: Casino

  • Pingback: Charm Bracelet Project

  • Pingback: porn

  • Pingback: http://yuzmek.com

  • Pingback: Blechercollins

  • Pingback: Charm Bracelet Project

  • Pingback: my site

  • Pingback: caftan marocain

  • Pingback: viagra

  • Pingback: Buy a 100ml Can of Hairfor2

  • Pingback: Security Detail For Award Show

  • Pingback: Mexican online pharmacy

  • Pingback: molotov mitchell

  • Pingback: poker system

  • Pingback: http://thomsonfxpro.net

  • Pingback: internet marketing forum

  • Pingback: viagra pills

  • Pingback: vision board

  • Pingback: visionboards online

  • Pingback: poker system

  • Pingback: tramadol generic

  • Pingback: visionboards online

  • Pingback: http://cetyerleri.com

  • Pingback: Game of Thrones Season 4 Finale Full Review!

  • Pingback: Garage door servie white plains

  • Pingback: jim rickards

  • Pingback: http://brucepeterkacfo.com

  • Pingback: The authors publishe

  • Pingback: cabanaboy42

  • Pingback: Canadian steroids

  • Pingback: teen fuck

  • Pingback: We cover everything supernatural, sci-fi, fantasy, superhero, and more

  • Pingback: http://invoicestuffers.com

  • Pingback: http://louisvillemovietimes.com

  • Pingback: http://mozgoreklam.com

  • Pingback: Modeling agency Las Vegas

  • Pingback: loyal 9 marketing

  • Pingback: http://pittsburghmovietimes.com

  • Pingback: Porno

  • Pingback: sichere kapitalanlage

  • Pingback: diabetolog lódz

  • Pingback: ukladanie kostki brukowej lódz

  • Pingback: http://suncashadvance.com

  • Pingback: http://podemi.net

  • Pingback: Toronto Product Photography

  • Pingback: http://device2013.com

  • Pingback: http://autozeitschrift.com

  • Pingback: sacred geometry

  • Pingback: http://jump-higher.net

  • Pingback: upholstery fabrics

  • Pingback: WP Blogs Manager

  • Pingback: http://xitracks.net

  • Pingback: naprawa szyb samochodowych lodz

  • Pingback: tworzenie stron internetowych lodz

  • Pingback: e cigarett

  • Pingback: kojce porodowe dla macior

  • Pingback: penn foster exam answers

  • Pingback: Bellevue Dentist

  • Pingback: http://rugbyseacadets.com

  • Pingback: cheap viagra

  • Pingback: http://grahamforsenate.net

  • Pingback: http://souslacanopee.com

  • Pingback: http://franklinmint.net

  • Pingback: http://renkz.com

  • Pingback: teds woodworking projects

  • Pingback: http://citychpd.net

  • Pingback: Sejfy ogniotrwale

  • Pingback: 3 Week Diet - How to Lose Weight Fast

  • Pingback: prasowanie koszul warszawa

  • Pingback: sprawdz ten sklep

  • Pingback: in here

  • Pingback: alkaline water

  • Pingback: viagra

  • Pingback: teemco

  • Pingback: JT Foxx

  • Pingback: AC Pricing Spring

  • Pingback: http://nvmweb.com

  • Pingback: Online Job 4men

  • Pingback: Independent Delivery Professionals location

  • Pingback: Online Poker

  • Pingback: Forex4you

  • Pingback: ciclo menstrual 35 dias periodo fertil

  • Pingback: comprar capas baratas

  • Pingback: Optimal Case

  • Pingback: transform exe to msi

  • Pingback: night club

  • Pingback: http://takingsurvivors.com

  • Pingback: Darian Braun Mikki More

  • Pingback: Noticias

  • Pingback: Roofing contractors Colorado Springs

  • Pingback: seo training

  • Pingback: free online slots

  • Pingback: play online slots

  • Pingback: Funny Videos

  • Pingback: penis

  • Pingback: assisted hosting

  • Pingback: buy social medias

  • Pingback: http://fordounsawmillwind.com

  • Pingback: Michigan Small Company Loans

  • Pingback: esprit manta hifi

  • Pingback: water ionizer

  • Pingback: San Antonio Botox Treatment

  • Pingback: http://humanisticmathematics.com

  • Pingback: http://stadt-zuerich.net

  • Pingback: http://westengineer.net

  • Pingback: http://suze-formation.com

  • Pingback: http://sholmansharesjuiceplus.com

  • Pingback: Website Design Detroit Best Rated

  • Pingback: http://plastker.com

  • Pingback: louisville accident doctor

  • Pingback: raspberry ketone uk

  • Pingback: SG Capital Group of Michigan

  • Pingback: shft prepper gear

  • Pingback: ofermedia peru

  • Pingback: Amauris Bastidas

  • Pingback: hotmail

  • Pingback: süperbahis

  • Pingback: süperbahis

  • Pingback: raspberry ketone uk

  • Pingback: Dorothy Scott

  • Pingback: kliknij tutaj

  • Pingback: resource

  • Pingback: gifts for women

  • Pingback: Shop cera bathroom fittings Online in India

  • Pingback: Arvind Pandit

  • Pingback: blogger

  • Pingback: this site

  • Pingback: blog

  • Pingback: video tutorial cake decorating

  • Pingback: Alex Thompson

  • Pingback: tf fitness

  • Pingback: halloween joke blood pillow

  • Pingback: oak furniture

  • Pingback: www.pfhelp.us

  • Pingback: printer cartridges

  • Pingback: how to find a job

  • Pingback: real estate marketing

  • Pingback: link

  • Pingback: cancun airport transfers

  • Pingback: clash of clans hack mac no survey

  • Pingback: how to jump higher blog

  • Pingback: oc bail bonds

  • Pingback: my friend cayla

  • Pingback: Hay Day Hack Ipad

  • Pingback: explain it videos

  • Pingback: water ionizers

  • Pingback: cayla doll

  • Pingback: Nether hacks

  • Pingback: clash of clans triche gemmes iphone

  • Pingback: north myrtle only golf packages winter and spring 2014

  • Pingback: (816) 479-2700 attorney bankruptcy

  • Pingback: recupero file

  • Pingback: transport

  • Pingback: iPhone 5 solar charger case

  • Pingback: discount diamond jewelry

  • Pingback: jewels jewelry

  • Pingback: millinery

  • Pingback: LIDAR Jammer

  • Pingback: superbahis

  • Pingback: black hat seo forum

  • Pingback: moocowpaydayloans.co.uk

  • Pingback: süperbahis

  • Pingback: cystinovary.com

  • Pingback: wwe HELL IN A CELL LIVE STREAM 2014

  • Pingback: "make money from home"

  • Pingback: scottsdale nails

  • Pingback: fleet tracking

  • Pingback: l?s upp telia

  • Pingback: hand made painting reproduction

  • Pingback: dlugopis cosmo

  • Pingback: make money online

  • Pingback: Gmail correo electrónico de Gmail.com

  • Pingback: electronics

  • Pingback: Free Fantasy Movies

  • Pingback: clash of clans hack

  • Pingback: merchant warehouse

  • Pingback: Sena

  • Pingback: your blog

  • Pingback: water heater replacement

  • Pingback: zi xiu tang

  • Pingback: buy cheap facebook likes

  • Pingback: hft

  • Pingback: party bus

  • Pingback: online poker

  • Pingback: comprar peru

  • Pingback: Level 5 Courses

  • Pingback: vender mexico

  • Pingback: comment

  • Pingback: web design

  • Pingback: what is applied social psychology

  • Pingback: furniture online singapore

  • Pingback: Leptin Supplement

  • Pingback: lawyer car accident

  • Pingback: Maduras XXX

  • Pingback: business

  • Pingback: buy facebook likes uk

  • Pingback: Fashion Style

  • Pingback: mexico viagra

  • Pingback: "trouble paying mortgage greenville, sc"

  • Pingback: what is striker fire action

  • Pingback: pikalaina

  • Pingback: pet rescue level 293

  • Pingback: serwery minecraft

  • Pingback: porn movies

  • Pingback: pigeon forge cabin rentals

  • Pingback: In Loving You - a Journey of Love and Self Discovery

  • Pingback: lenceria sexy

  • Pingback: wisetrail

  • Pingback: in here

  • Pingback: rojadireecta

  • Pingback: uk point of sale

  • Pingback: Motor Club Of America Scam

  • Pingback: bus tours to new york from halifax

  • Pingback: in here

  • Pingback: Home Upgrade

  • Pingback: Charm Bracelet Project

  • Pingback: in here

  • Pingback: Charm Bracelet Project

  • Pingback: click for more

  • Pingback: 獅泉河

  • Pingback: website

  • Pingback: how to hack wifi password

  • Pingback: business financing

  • Pingback: Spyhunter Download

  • Pingback: here source

  • Pingback: forskolin weight loss supplements

  • Pingback: Blechercollins

  • Pingback: free poker

  • Pingback: Johnson Farm Machinery Sickle Servicer

  • Pingback: reverse Lookup

  • Pingback: blogshop

  • Pingback: online payment processing

  • Pingback: increase youtube views

  • Pingback: about

  • Pingback: my source

  • Pingback: click here

  • Pingback: free training

  • Pingback: car finance

  • Pingback: starting baking business home uk

  • Pingback: pengobatan keropos tulang

  • Pingback: blogger

  • Pingback: litecoins

  • Pingback: Lexmark printer repair

  • Pingback: fdpod

  • Pingback: Locksmith Oklahoma City

  • Pingback: internet service provider

  • Pingback: 24 hour locksmith

  • Pingback: Foreclosure Law Firm in Miami

  • Pingback: life insurance quotes

  • Pingback: jobs in leicester

  • Pingback: next

  • Pingback: abnehmen

  • Pingback: how to train a blue heeler

  • Pingback: Rc drone

  • Pingback: these views got me banned

  • Pingback: Arvind Pandit

  • Pingback: yellow october

  • Pingback: make money

  • Pingback: make money online

  • Pingback: artist paint brushes

  • Pingback: home internet service providers

  • Pingback: best car insurance

  • Pingback: pr ajansı

  • Pingback: wedding dresses toronto

  • Pingback: small business loans

  • Pingback: movie my cousin vinny

  • Pingback: xbox wont connect to internet

  • Pingback: about

  • Pingback: how to get bigger breasts naturally fast in a 2 week

  • Pingback: Neck Pain Victoria

  • Pingback: hansel and gretel kids movie

  • Pingback: naprawa komputerów Bydgoszcz

  • Pingback: PHP Booking Engine

  • Pingback: ????????????????

  • Pingback: loan debt consolidation

  • Pingback: general

  • Pingback: mattress

  • Pingback: Anonymous

  • Pingback: great info

  • Pingback: telephone services

  • Pingback: 816-536-3432 fence vinyl

  • Pingback: Web Site

  • Pingback: Flat Fee MLS IL

  • Pingback: security systems

  • Pingback: domain

  • Pingback: tutaj

  • Pingback: look at more info

  • Pingback: saran wrap for weight loss

  • Pingback: Improve Credit Status

  • Pingback: michael profile

  • Pingback: xbox live free trial

  • Pingback: cheapest e liquid

  • Pingback: (816) 373-9080 personal injury attorneys

  • Pingback: indie bands

  • Pingback: How To Recover Deleted Pictures From Sd Card



  • Pingback: Pharmacy Perth

  • Pingback: Celebrity Bikini body

  • Pingback: devis demenagement

  • Pingback: way law

  • Pingback: travel mask

  • Pingback: wypozyczalnia samochodów dostawczych

  • Pingback: wynajem samochodow

  • Pingback: IT Services

  • Pingback: devis demenagement

  • Pingback: seo training

  • Pingback: law

  • Pingback: sandblasting equipment perth

  • Pingback: sandblasting equipment perth

  • Pingback: funerals perth

  • Pingback: drawing

  • Pingback: fast home selling

  • Pingback: archive box

  • Pingback: Easy Sketch Pro 2 software

  • Pingback: homes

  • Pingback: Timber Decking Perth

  • Pingback: Locksmith Oklahoma City

  • Pingback: best price

  • Pingback: marketing digital

  • Pingback: check my blog

  • Pingback: weight loss postpartum

  • Pingback: flyer distribution

  • Pingback: purificadoras de agua

  • Pingback: Illinois process server

  • Pingback: buy hacks

  • Pingback: gold ira rollover

  • Pingback: gold ira

  • Pingback: comment

  • Pingback: Pirater compte Skype

  • Pingback: kinder surprise

  • Pingback: latest mobile phones

  • Pingback: my source

  • Pingback: devis demenagement

  • Pingback: singles chat here

  • Pingback: devis demenagement

  • Pingback: lawyers in chicago

  • Pingback: moodle mod resource view.php id=15

  • Pingback: school system

  • Pingback: in here

  • Pingback: waskostet.net

  • Pingback: youtube video for australia

  • Pingback: how to make money while traveling

  • Pingback: how to make 1000

  • Pingback: toys with apps

  • Pingback: internet resources

  • Pingback: gadgets

  • Pingback: credit card offers

  • Pingback: Carlsbad personal injury lawyer

  • Pingback: Full Time RV Living

  • Pingback: Free Google play Apps

  • Pingback: online work from home

  • Pingback: your site

  • Pingback: mattress singapore

  • Pingback: mattress singapore

  • Pingback: hen party in brighton

  • Pingback: coupon codes

  • Pingback: play restaurant games

  • Pingback: burlesque brighton

  • Pingback: medical assistant schools

  • Pingback: como hackear cuenta cuenta

  • Pingback: discount ticket

  • Pingback: red fishing new orleans la

  • Pingback: cellulite cream

  • Pingback: late deals holiday

  • Pingback: Identity Design

  • Pingback: infinity downline support

  • Pingback: make money with social media

  • Pingback: once upon a time season 4 episode 7

  • Pingback: your shopping Headquarters

  • Pingback: dentist games

  • Pingback: www.kakprosto.ru

  • Pingback: resources here

  • Pingback: www.kakprosto.ru/

  • Pingback: Celebrity Swimsuits

  • Pingback: tshirt innovate or die

  • Pingback: justin brethorst tshirt those that live in fear are often met with their fears

  • Pingback: ray ban sonnenbrille

  • Pingback: sales

  • Pingback: resource

  • Pingback: new porn videos

  • Pingback: new blog

  • Pingback: backlink builder

  • Pingback: zobacz

  • Pingback: focus pill

  • Pingback: kebijakan privasi

  • Pingback: telechargement gratuit films

  • Pingback: fashion photographers

  • Pingback: Ratchet

  • Pingback: penis enlargment

  • Pingback: online jobs from home

  • Pingback: acai berry side effects

  • Pingback: sports betting

  • Pingback: xarelto attorneys

  • Pingback: xarelto

  • Pingback: online betting bonuses

  • Pingback: stryker hip lawsuits

  • Pingback: call of duty advanced warfare hack

  • Pingback: online casinos bonus

  • Pingback: web hosting reviews

  • Pingback: online casino bonus


  • Pingback: porno gratis

  • Pingback: call of duty advanced warfare hacks

  • Pingback: Lawyer Everett Newton

  • Pingback: radarandlaserforum

  • Pingback: clemson lawyer

  • Pingback: money box

  • Pingback: Extraenergie

  • Pingback: buy instagram followers cheap here

  • Pingback: area 51 aliens

  • Pingback: san francisco hotel

  • Pingback: The Truth About Abs

  • Pingback: radar and laser forum

  • Pingback: wypozyczalnia samochodów dostawczych

  • Pingback: wypozyczalnia busów

  • Pingback: Blank Space

  • Pingback: cccam sky

  • Pingback: expert interview coach

  • Pingback: Physical Therapy

  • Pingback: arganolie

  • Pingback: Work Injuries

  • Pingback: diabetes miracle cure review

  • Pingback: Candles & Candle Holders

  • Pingback: fungal nails

  • Pingback: hotels

  • Pingback: paris metro pass

  • Pingback: summit school ministry

  • Pingback: best binary trading bot

  • Pingback: noveller novell

  • Pingback: Fireplace Repair Mesa

  • Pingback: personal tracking gps

  • Pingback: personal gps tracking system

  • Pingback: Click Here

  • Pingback: cellinea

  • Pingback: payday loans

  • Pingback: gemstone

  • Pingback: cheapest hacks

  • Pingback: srebrzenie

  • Pingback: history of photography

  • Pingback: rci

  • Pingback: Diets that actually work

  • Pingback: Virginia Remodeling

  • Pingback: Porno

  • Pingback: Auto Mechanic Repair Atlanta

  • Pingback: how can i see whatsapp messages of my friend

  • Pingback: how to hack mobile messages

  • Pingback: reviews of GreenSmoke

  • Pingback: napa valley cabernet

  • Pingback: news

  • Pingback: car insurance

  • Pingback: your blog

  • Pingback: my website

  • Pingback: Printing Company

  • Pingback: julegave til hende

  • Pingback: free aimbot download

  • Pingback: johnny the healer complaints

  • Pingback: my website

  • Pingback: spiritual life coaches

  • Pingback: general

  • Pingback: graffiti

  • Pingback: about-us

  • Pingback: fast payday loans

  • Pingback: Taimur Khan is a co-founder of Blueberry

  • Pingback: San Antonio Pest Control

  • Pingback: personal health care

  • Pingback: malaysia culture

  • Pingback: Bookmakers

  • Pingback: vanity Nummer beantragen

  • Pingback: rock artist photos

  • Pingback: the venus factor

  • Pingback: canyoning in dalat

  • Pingback: Post divorce lawyers

  • Pingback: seo vancouver

  • Pingback: Tha Mey

  • Pingback: get more website traffic

  • Pingback: Automotive

  • Pingback: free technical stock screener

  • Pingback: Holzhaus

  • Pingback: music promoter uk

  • Pingback: MFiT mastering

  • Pingback: budget mastering audio

  • Pingback: paris vacation rentals

  • Pingback: Celtics fansite

  • Pingback: Vitrier de Gentilly

  • Pingback: Our Photos

  • Pingback: jovialmum entertainment

  • Pingback: Bedrifter online

  • Pingback: zobacz tutaj

  • Pingback: Pennies for papa foundation

  • Pingback: online shopping fashion

  • Pingback: canadian viagra

  • Pingback: employment ads

  • Pingback: visit website

  • Pingback: Wavelength Division Multiplexer

  • Pingback: Deep etch

  • Pingback: Bases de Emails

  • Pingback: Automotive

  • Pingback: Automotive

  • Pingback: huntsville water leaks

  • Pingback: plumbers in huntsville

  • Pingback: Civil Engineering

  • Pingback: Quantenheilung Köln

  • Pingback: top SEO

  • Pingback: My Daily Choice Scam

  • Pingback: buy viagra

  • Pingback: alkaline water benefits

  • Pingback: cheap viagra

  • Pingback: Automotive

  • Pingback: lawyers marketing

  • Pingback: Best Buy Deals

  • Pingback: articles

  • Pingback: this page

  • Pingback: tampa seo services

  • Pingback: Socials Follower Kaufen

  • Pingback: msnbc ed schultz