Wesley Salmon |

Since Michael Martin begins his chapter on atheistic teleological arguments (ATAs) with a discussion of Wesley Salmon’s 1978 article, “Religion and Science: A New Look at Hume’s Dialogues,” let us review Salmon’s argument.[1] My goal now is simply to figure out what Salmon’s argument is; I will defer an *assessment* of Salmon’s argument until later. Some readers, especially those who are not philosophers or who are not familiar with the different interpretations of probability–may just want to skip this summary and jump straight to the later post in this series which gives the logical form of Salmon’s argument.

It is unfortunate (and inconvenient) that Salmon never explicitly stated the logical form of his argument in his 1978 article.[2] For that reason, then, I’ll attempt to provide a summary of his article, without commentary, before offering what I consider to be the logical form of Salmon’s argument.

Salmon’s article divides into ten sections:

1. The Design Argument

2. Causal Hypotheses and Bayes’s Theorem

3. Philo’s Estimates

4. The Uniqueness of the Universe

5. Order and Purpose

6. The Concept of Order

7. Modern Cosmology

8. Assessment of the Hypothesis

9. The Relevance of the Scientific Evidence

10. Postscript: Hume’s Intentions

Here is a brief summary of each section.

(1) ** The Design Argument**: Salmon sets the stage for his argument by reviewing Hume’s discussion of the design argument in his

*Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion.*Philo, presumably speaking for Hume, focuses on “experimental theism,” viz., “the thesis that the existence of God can be approached as a scientific hypothesis, and that His existence can be established with a high degree of confirmation by observational evidence.” According to Salmon, Hume recognized that design arguments must be evaluated the same way we evaluate “causal hypotheses in science” (170).

(2) ** Causal Hypotheses and Bayes’s Theorem**: Salmon’s stated preference for analyzing causal hypotheses is to use Bayes’s theorem. Let

*A*be any instance of

*coming-into-being;*

*B*be any instance of the

*operation of intelligence;*and

*C*be any instance that exhibits

*order or design.[3]*Finally, let

*Pr-F*represent a probability value, as interpreted by the frequency interpretation of probability, viz., the limit of the relative frequency. We can then use Bayes’s theorem to analyze the proportion of entities in B which occur in the total sample space, which is defined by A & C:

The value on the left-hand side of Bayes’s Theorem, Pr-F(B | A & C), is the final or posterior probability. Salmon identifies the three values that must be known in order to determine this value:

(a) __Prior probability of B__: In symbols, this is Pr-F(B | A); in English, this is the probability that an instance is the operation of intelligence, conditional upon that instance being an entity which comes into being. As Salmon correctly points out, if we know this value then we can easily calculate the other prior probability: Pr-F(~B | A) = 1 – Pr-F(B | A).

(b) __Likelihood of C__: In symbols, this is Pr-F(C | A & B); in English, this is the probability that an entity exhibits order, conditional upon that entity being a result of intelligence, i.e., intelligent design.

(c) __Likelihood of ~C__: In symbols, this is Pr-F(C | A & ~B); in English, this is the probability than an entity exhibits order, conditional upon that entity *not* being the result of intelligent design.

While major figures in inductive logic disagree about the best way to interpret these probability values (e.g., classical, frequency, epistemic, etc.), according to Salmon many such figures have accepted the use of Bayes’s theorem to assess scientific hypotheses.

(3) ** Philo’s Estimates**: Salmon’s belief is that Hume addressed the three types of probability values just listed in order to assess theism using Bayes’s theorem, despite Hume’s apparent ignorance of it. Salmon then proceeds to summarize how Philo assessed the requisite values to apply Bayes’s Theorem to the hypothesis of intelligent design.

(a) __Prior probability of B__. Salmon explained that Philo identified four types of causation:

(i) order resulting from *reproductive biological *causation (hereafter, “biological generation”);

(ii) order resulting from *non-reproductive biological *causation, e.g., bees making honeycombs, spiders making spider webs, etc. (hereafter, “instinct”);

(iii) *mechanical *causation, e.g., formation of snowflakes, galaxies, etc. (hereafter, “mechanical order”); and

(iv) *intelligent design.*

Given the sheer quantity of known entities which fall into types (i), (ii), and (iii), Philo argued, the prior probability–i.e., the limit of the relative frequency–of something coming into being as the result of intelligence is “incredibly small” while the prior probability of its denial is high (174). As Salmon points out, the quantity of entities of type (iii), includes the number of *galaxies *(10 billion), *stars *(10-100 billion per galaxy), and *atoms *(10^{50} atoms in our sun alone), is now known to be much greater than what Hume supposed.

(b) __Likelihood of C__. Salmon, like Hume, acknowledges this value may be “quite high,” but points out the posterior probability of B “may still be quite low” if Pr-F(~B | A) and Pr-F(C | A & ~B) are large enough (175). According to Salmon, “Philo brings out these considerations quite explicitly” (175).

(c) __Likelihood of ~C__. As Salmon correctly points out, Philo provided evidence that this value is not negligible, given his examples of reproductive biological, non-reproductive biological, and mechanical causation.

Salmon concludes that Hume provided arguments to justify all of the values “which appear on the right-hand side of Bayes’s theorem” (175). Accordingly, if we apply Bayes’s theorem to “an unspecified entity, which came into being and exhibited order,” the (frequency) probability that it “was produced by intelligent design is rather low” (175).

(4) ** The Uniqueness of the Universe**: Based on the results of the previous section, one might be tempted to construct a Bayesian argument against theism, based upon the evidence that the universe is an object exhibiting order. Salmon correctly points out, however, the matter “cannot be settled that easily” (176): the event of the creation of the universe is a

*single case.*Salmon is well aware that single case probabilities are notoriously problematic in probability theory,[4] especially for the frequency interpretation of probability, which is Salmon’s interpretation.[5] The general rule for dealing with single case probabilities, as he puts it, “is to refer to the individual case to the broadest homogeneous class available–i.e., to the broadest class that cannot be relevantly subdivided” (176).[6]

In order to select the *broadest homogeneous reference class* for the creation of the universe, Salmon says, we must carefully consider both (i) “the type of order the universe exhibits;” and (ii) “the nature of the intelligent creator hypothesized by the proponent of natural theology,” viz., the divine attributes according to classical theism (176). Regarding (i), Salmon interprets Hume as arguing that the type of order exhibited by the universe more closely resembles mechanical order than biological reproductive order (177). As for (ii), Salmon identifies the traditional set of divine attributes: a disembodied mind who created the universe and is intelligent, powerful, and benevolent (178).

Let’s suppose that Salmon is right about (i) and (ii). What, then, is the “broadest homogeneous reference class” for the event of the creation of the universe, according to Salmon? He doesn’t say explicitly. As I read him, he seems to consider three possible answers. Let us consider each in turn.

(a) __The Disembodied Designer Option__. Traditional theism defines God as, among other things, a disembodied mind. So this option identifies the broadest homogeneous reference class to be *artifacts produced by a disembodied intelligence.* Using that reference class, Salmon argues that “since disembodied intelligence has never operated in any fashion,” the relative frequency of artifacts resulting from disembodied intelligence is zero. Hence, Pr-F(B | A) = 0. Pr-F(C | B & A) is undefined.

(b) __The Mechanical Order and Design Hypothesis without Moral Attributes Option__: Let M represent mechanical order. Since M entails ~B, M is logically equivalent to M & ~B. According to Salmon, that the prior probability of mechanical order is equal to or greater than the prior probability of intelligent design sans moral attributes, i.e., Pr-F(M | A) >= Pr-F(B | A). Furthermore, the likelihood of the order exhibited by the universe is equal on *both* the mechanical hypothesis *and *the design hypothesis (sans moral attributes), i.e., Pr-F(C | M & A) = Pr-F(C | A).

(c) __The Mechanical Order and Design Hypothesis with Moral Attributes Option__: Let O represent the hypothesis that the intelligent designer is omnibenevolent. If we include moral attributes in the definition of the intelligent designer, Salmon argues, then the intelligent design hypothesis has a lower likelihood than the mechanical hypothesis, i.e., Pr-F(C | M & A) > Pr-F(C | O & B & A).

How does Salmon support that judgment of likelihood values? By employing a probabilistic argument about apparently gratuitous evil.[7] Salmon points out that Philo, in the eleventh dialogue, asks if empirical facts about the world are what we would *antecedently *expect on theism. Philo then lists four ways in which an all-powerful creator could have reduced the amount of evil in the world if He had wanted to: (i) pain need not be inflicted upon man; (ii) God need not have governed the world by inviolable general laws; (iii) God could have endowed human beings and other species with additional abilities to make their existence less hazardous; and (iv) God could have better designed the universe so that the “springs and principles” of nature do not run into one of the 2 extremes of “feast or famine.” Salmon concludes that Pr(B & O | A & C) is very low.[8]

If the prior probability of M and B & O are equal but M has a higher likelihood, then it follows that the mechanical hypothesis has a higher posterior probability than the moral designer hypothesis (i.e., theism), i.e., Pr-F(M | A & C) > Pr(B & O | A & C).

(5) ** Order and Purpose**: In Hume’s

*Dialogues,*Cleanthes’ most careful statement of the design argument “describes the universe as a ‘great machine,’ composed of a prolific array of ‘lesser machines,’ all of which are characterized by ‘the curious adapting of means to ends’” (182). In other words, Cleanthes “appeals to a teleological conception of order” in his defense of the design argument (182). Philo, however, responded to Cleanthes by pointing out that equating order and design “flagrantly begs the question” (183). Salmon contends that the theist who proclaims that the order exhibited by the universe is evidence of intelligent design must make an “a priori announcement,” an “anthropomorphic concept” which the proponent of “experimental theism” eschews (183).

According to Salmon, Hume’s eighth dialogue contains “a rather clear anticipation of a non-teleological theory of biological evolution” (183). Just as Galileo and Newton removed Aristotelian teleological conceptions from physics,[8] Salmon argues, Darwin “rid the biological sciences of their teleological elements.” Salmon concludes, “Order in the physical world, and in its biological realms, was shown to be independent of intelligent design” (183).

(6) ** The Concept of Order**: In this section, Salmon delivers the clarified concept of order he promised earlier in section 3. According to Salmon, the universe exhibits two kinds of order: (i) physical objects obey physical laws; and (ii) the universe “exhibits an orderly configuration” (184).

Furthermore, Salmon writes, scientists have developed the concept of entropy, which turns out to be useful for clarifying the kind of order we find in the world. Entropy, he says, is “a measure of the unavailability of energy to do mechanical work” (185). Thus, to say that the entropy of the universe is low “is tantamount to saying that the universe contains large stores of available energy” (185). Using statistical interpretations of thermodynamics and entropy, scientists discovered that low entropy is associated with non-random, highly ordered arrangements, which are relatively improbable, while high entropy is associated with random, unordered arrangements which are relatively probable.

If we apply the concept of entropy to the role “order” plays in the design argument, Salmon says, we can determine the percentage of physical systems which “come into being in low entropy states” and which “are created with conscious design” (186). What is that percentage? According to Salmon, “An exceedingly small proportion of low entropy systems–i.e., systems which are highly organized and orderly–result from an interaction with the environment which involves any conscious purpose or design.”

(7) ** Modern Cosmology**: Relying upon physicist Steven Weinberg, Salmon rehearses the state of modern cosmology in 1978, which includes scientific evidence (a) for Big Bang cosmology; and (b) regarding the number of galaxies (10B), stars per galaxy (10B), and atoms per star (10

^{50}). Salmon takes this to be unparalleled in human history. He asks, “Where in the annals of human history can we find like numbers of systems created in low entropy states by conscious human intervention?” (187).

(8) ** Assessment of the Hypothesis**: Salmon summarizes his assessment of the scientific evidence; he concludes that modern scientific evidence pushes “the posterior probability of intelligent design even closer to zero” (188).

(9) ** The Relevance of the Scientific Evidence**: Salmon concludes that his analysis of the scientific evidence “tend[s] to show that there is no intelligent creator [of the universe] (although it is admittedly irrelevant to other theological hypotheses)” (189).

(10) ** Postscript: Hume’s Intentions**: Salmon attempts to defend his interpretation of Hume. Since I am uninterested in that topic, I will not summarize this section.

**Series on Atheistic Teleological Arguments**

**Notes**

[1] Salmon did not label his argument an “atheistic teleological argument;” in fact, so far as I can tell, Salmon did not name his argument at all. The name was coined by Michael Martin in his *Atheism: A Philosophical Justification *(Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990).

[2] Wesley Salmon, “Religion and Science: A New Look at Hume’s Dialogues.” In Michael Martin and Ricci Monier, *The Improbability of God *(Buffalo: Prometheus, 2006), 167-93. Originally published in *Philosophical Studies *33 (1978): 143-76. Further references will be provided in the body of this article.

[3] I owe this formulation of Salmon’s classes to Sally Ferguson, “Bayesianism, Analogy, and Hume’s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion,” *Hume Studies *28:1 (April 2002): 113-130 at 119.

[4] Wesley Salmon, *The Foundations of Scientific Inference *(Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1967), 90-93.

[5] Salmon 1967, 91-92.

[6] As Salmon notes, Carl G. Hempel argued for a similar requirement, his requirement of maximal specificity. Cf. Carl G. Hempel, *Aspects of Scientific Explanation *(New York: Free Press, 1965), 397-403, cited in Salmon 2006, 192, n. 14.

[7] Although Salmon states, “It is crucial to realize that Philo is not raising the traditional theological problem of evil” (178), I interpret this to mean that Philo is not raising the logical argument from evil.

[8] O is my invention; I have inserted O into the expression in order to make explicit the role of the designer’s moral attributes. Salmon’s article keeps that implicit and so he writes about Pr(B | A & C). Also, I am unsure which interpretation of probability Salmon had in mind when he wrote that Pr(B | A & C) is low. In the rest of the article, he employs a frequency interpretation, but his reference to “antecedently expect” followed by a listing of four reasons seems to make more sense on an epistemic interpretation than on a frequency interpretation.

[9] It might be more accurate to say that Galileo and Newton removed the need for a Platonic teleology (i.e., teleology put there by a divine intelligence), not an Aristotelian teleology.

Pingback: nike air max 90 pas cher

Pingback: replique montre suisse

Pingback: air max 90 pas cher

Pingback: christian louboutin pas cher

Pingback: nike pas cher

Pingback: コーチ

Pingback: jordan sneakers for cheap

Pingback: nike air max 1 pas cher

Pingback: louis vuitton sac

Pingback: jordan 11 retro Legend blue

Pingback: トリーバーチ バッグ年齢,トリーバーチ バッグ 手入れ,トリーバーチキャンバスシューズ

Pingback: トリーバーチ ロビンソン イエロー,トリーバーチ amanda easy tote,トリーバーチ クロスボディダブルチェーン

Pingback: buy wow gold

Pingback: jordan retro 13

Pingback: Nike KD VII

Pingback: ugg boots

Pingback: air max pas cher

Pingback: mulberry outlet

Pingback: sac louis vuitton

Pingback: Jordan Gamma Blue 11s

Pingback: Louis Vuitton Outlet Online

Pingback: louis vuitton wallet

Pingback: lebron 12 for sale

Pingback: veste givenchy pas cher

Pingback: cheap lebron 12

Pingback: louis vuitton purses

Pingback: jordan 6 black infrared

Pingback: coach factory outlet

Pingback: Toro 4s

Pingback: michael kors outlet online

Pingback: foamposites

Pingback: kate spade purses

Pingback: Legend blue 11s for sale

Pingback: red timberland boots size 5

Pingback: lululemon sale

Pingback: coach outlet

Pingback: Foamposite red Suede

Pingback: Leborn 12

Pingback: nike lebron 12

Pingback: jordan retro 2 white red

Pingback: michael kors bags

Pingback: louis vuitton purses

Pingback: 3m 13s

Pingback: Jordan 6 Black Infrared

Pingback: louis vuitton online shop

Pingback: Legend blue 11s

Pingback: louis vuitton outlet

Pingback: louis vuitton neverfull mm

Pingback: jordan retro 6

Pingback: White Carmine 6s

Pingback: coach black friday deals

Pingback: wireless beats by dre

Pingback: Foamposites elephant print

Pingback: michael kors purses

Pingback: ralph lauren femme

Pingback: portefeuille givenchy

Pingback: taschen givenchy

Pingback: ceinture gucci pas cher

Pingback: ralph lauren billig

Pingback: roshe run nike

Pingback: black toe 14s

Pingback: michael kors outlet

Pingback: cyber monday north face deals

Pingback: Gamma Blue 11

Pingback: kate spade black Friday

Pingback: black infrared 6s

Pingback: louis vuitton official website

Pingback: louis vuitton uk

Pingback: jordan 11

Pingback: sacoche louis vuitton

Pingback: Black Red 13s

Pingback: ugg sale

Pingback: Cheap Black Infrared 6s

Pingback: cyber monday deals on ugg boots

Pingback: coach black friday deals

Pingback: ralph lauren polo shirts

Pingback: jordan 11 infrared speckle

Pingback: jordan 11 legend blue

Pingback: Foamposites volt

Pingback: louis vuitton belts

Pingback: louis vuitton shoes

Pingback: Legend Blue 11s

Pingback: michael kors outlet

Pingback: louboutin homme marie 75017

Pingback: Jordan 11 Legend Blue

Pingback: coach black friday

Pingback: north face black friday sale

Pingback: Wolf grey 3s

Pingback: mulberry outlet uk

Pingback: jordan turbo green 6

Pingback: National characteristics of painting

Pingback: michael kors cyber monday deals

Pingback: Replica ysl bags outlet

Pingback: jordan 6 brazil world cup pack

Pingback: michael kors factory outlet

Pingback: lebron james shoes

Pingback: michael kors cyber monday

Pingback: Nike KD 7 DMV

Pingback: louis vuitton wallet

Pingback: louis vuitton belt

Pingback: Legend blue 11

Pingback: billige Parajumpers Adirondack Kvinnor

Pingback: バッグ 激安

Pingback: nike air jordan 11 low ebay

Pingback: miu miu

Pingback: FiFa 15 coins

Pingback: yeezy foamposites

Pingback: louis vuitton schal

Pingback: blackout 13

Pingback: michael kors outlet online

Pingback: uggs black friday

Pingback: michael kors bags

Pingback: michael kors women in combat roles in the military

Pingback: prada jobs melbourne

Pingback: louboutin homme geant casino pessac

Pingback: mulberry outlet london address finder england

Pingback: Jordan 11 Columbia

Pingback: cheap jordan shoes

Pingback: jordan retro 11 Legend blue

Pingback: replica designer givenchy handbag uk

Pingback: hogan interactive 1997

Pingback: Doudoune Canada Goose homme

Pingback: coach factory outlet

Pingback: Lebron 11 What The Lebron

Pingback: chaussure louis vuitton

Pingback: louis vuitton purses

Pingback: Real Black Infrared 6s

Pingback: Moncler USA and Canada

Pingback: louis vuitton outlet online

Pingback: jordan black Oreo 6

Pingback: jordan 11 legend blue

Pingback: jordan 11 pantone

Pingback: kate spade sale

Pingback: louis vuitton handbags

Pingback: ray ban wayfarer discount

Pingback: ray ban wayfarer in london

Pingback: louis vuitton wallet

Pingback: nike mercurial iii for sale

Pingback: Legend Blue 11s

Pingback: michael kors handbags

Pingback: Authentic Legend Blue 11s

Pingback: beats by dre black friday

Pingback: timberland online es

Pingback: Tory-Burch-Reva-Leopard-Ballerina-Flat

Pingback: toms 69 camaro ebay motors

Pingback: cinture gucci outlet online

Pingback: What The Lebron 11

Pingback: louis vuitton online shop

Pingback: wolf grey 3s for sale

Pingback: michael kors outlet

Pingback: pantone 11

Pingback: Jordan 13 blackout

Pingback: Cheap Louis Vuitton

Pingback: jordan Legend blue 11

Pingback: jordan 14 ferrari

Pingback: coach black friday

Pingback: ligne ray ban violet couleur

Pingback: jordan 11 infrared speckle

Pingback: louis vuitton portemonnaie

Pingback: cyber monday michael kors

Pingback: louis vuitton outlet

Pingback: cheap jordans

Pingback: nike Lebron 12 Lion Heart

Pingback: coach factory online

Pingback: legend blue 11

Pingback: Legend blue 11s

Pingback: louis vuitton handbags

Pingback: Jordan 11 Infrared 23

Pingback: michael kors cyber monday

Pingback: louis vuitton handtaschen

Pingback: Cheap lebron 12

Pingback: Kate Spade Coupon

Pingback: ヴィトン 公式シャネル

Pingback: True Religion Jeans Sale

Pingback: retro jordans

Pingback: http://www.opticien-gouraud.com/div-lulu.asp

Pingback: jordan 11 legend blue

Pingback: jordan 2 white red

Pingback: louis vuitton outlet

Pingback: prada vpr 07p

Pingback: Legend Blue 11

Pingback: michael kors handbags

Pingback: Legend blue 11

Pingback: jordan 13 black infrared 23

Pingback: Selfridges Moncler

Pingback: jordan 13 3m reflective

Pingback: gym red 1s

Pingback: Legend blue 11s

Pingback: Legend Blue 11s

Pingback: coach outlet online

Pingback: ugg sale

Pingback: Tory Burch Outlet

Pingback: バッグ ヴィトン 通販 激安

Pingback: louis vuitton clutch

Pingback: Louis Vuitton Outlet

Pingback: 2014ÐÂÐÍ¥·¥Õ¥©¥ó¥Þ¥Õ¥é©`éL´ºÇïIÓÃ¥¹¥«©`¥ÕÅ®ÐÔÉ°½í·À¡þ¤¬ÒŽ¸ñÆ·¤Î¥¹¥È©`¥ë¥Þ¥Õ¥é©`, "ÙÈë¤·¤Æ2014ÐÂÐÍ¥·¥Õ¥©¥ó¥Þ¥Õ¥é©`´ºÇïIÓÃéL¥¹¥«©`¥ÕÅ®ÐÔÉ

Pingback: prada it sito ufficiale

Pingback: lebron 12

Pingback: black friday michael kors

Pingback: jordan 13 barons

Pingback: Legend blue 11s for sale

Pingback: ralph lauren polo

Pingback: Miu Miu replica bags

Pingback: Jordan 11

Pingback: timberland uk

Pingback: cheap ugg boots

Pingback: Jordan 13 Black Red

Pingback: New Chanel Handbags

Pingback: louis vuitton outlet

Pingback: cheap lebron 12

Pingback: celine luggage nano 2012

Pingback: Louis Vuitton Outlet Store

Pingback: imitation sac gucci

Pingback: kate spade black Friday

Pingback: uggs sale

Pingback: louis vuitton purses

Pingback: michael kors outlet

Pingback: Toro Bravo 4s For Sale

Pingback: nike free 2

Pingback: nike air max pas cher

Pingback: nike tn pas cher

Pingback: True Religion Jeans Men

Pingback: ルイヴィトン ブランドバッグ

Pingback: cheap louis vuitton

Pingback: ヴィトン ジッピー バッグ

Pingback: kate spade black Friday

Pingback: jordan 11 legend blue

Pingback: outlet piumini moncler

Pingback: Louis Vuitton UK

Pingback: Legend blue 11s 2014

Pingback: Nike KD VII DMV

Pingback: gucci 2010 cruise sunglasses

Pingback: Carmine 6s

Pingback: ugg outlet

Pingback: Barons 13s

Pingback: kate spade black Friday

Pingback: barbour hood

Pingback: foamposites

Pingback: pantone 6s

Pingback: nike blazer

Pingback: Hurry while stock lasts design your own nike air max 90 Inflation Unmasked with These Halloween Markdowns UK with best qualitu and free shipping in our Luxury Items Online Store

Pingback: jordan retro 6

Pingback: Real Legend Blue 11s

Pingback: ligne ray ban france

Pingback: jordan 6 black infrared

Pingback: vrai ou fausse moncler

Pingback: michael kors purses

Pingback: jordan 6 brazil world cup pack

Pingback: jordan 11 legend blue

Pingback: timberland regional library website

Pingback: barbour hood

Pingback: michael kors wallet

Pingback: louis vuitton outlet

Pingback: jordans for sale

Pingback: How To Get Legend Blue 11s

Pingback: jordan 6 retro pantone

Pingback: air max one

Pingback: nike air max lime green

Pingback: north face black friday

Pingback: aviator sunglasses

Pingback: hermes voyage 26

Pingback: jordan 6 white carmine

Pingback: Nike KD 7 USA

Pingback: timberland boots street style

Pingback: nike roshe run mercurial custom by cdk customs

Pingback: canada goose coats

Pingback: legend blue 11s

Pingback: barbour hurricane jacket

Pingback: basket jordan 91.9fm

Pingback: nike blazer

Pingback: michael kors outlet online

Pingback: nike air max jordan

Pingback: coach handbags

Pingback: vintage b&l ray ban u

Pingback: outlet maletas agatha ruiz dela prada

Pingback: culos de sol prada pr08o feminino

Pingback: air jordan 13

Pingback: barbour handbags

Pingback: canada goose jacket

Pingback: nike id

Pingback: nike air max 1 sc chili

Pingback: Infrared 23 Low 11s

Pingback: black friday north face sale

Pingback: coach factory online

Pingback: Best Deals nike air max t shirt Outlet UK ,you can enjoy free-shipping

Pingback: nike air max classic bw bestellen

Pingback: shop beats by dre

Pingback: ugg outlet

Pingback: lancel soldes ordinateurs sous linux

Pingback: jordan 6 retro black infrared

Pingback: louis vuitton outlet

Pingback: jordan retro 11 pantone

Pingback: Louis vuitton tasche

Pingback: michael kors black friday sale

Pingback: Louis vuitton tasche

Pingback: purchasing longchamp bags in paris