Human evolution vs Creationism

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,571
54,467
136
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

I don't waste my time reading trash, unless of course its a Doc Savage book ?life is too short. For the record, I never asked you to hold my hand regarding the minutia of Dawkin's atheistic beliefs and had no expectation for you to do so. Dude?you're the one making ridiculous statements as if they were fact. You made this statement "His argument is that the existence of god is highly, highly improbable, and that is one that can be completely supported through science." All I'm asking is that you back it up. If you don't believe this statement, then please retract or further elaborate. I'll eat a large portion of humble pie if you can produce a credible scientific study that enumerates the probabilities against the existence of God. But who are we kidding? There is nothing in science that completely supports (or even remotely for that matter) the premise that the existence of god is highly, highly improbable. Zero, nada, zilch. I know where Dawkin is coming from?but, the $64 question is, are you coming from the same place?

In my opinion, Dawkin's first option was poorly constructed and did not adequately define the concept of a Creator. Contrasting "a complex being to account for the complexity that we see" with "simple origins and principles, something more complex can emerge" as mutually exclusive theories is blatant logical fallacy. I worded the third option to show that there is no conflict between the two theories?as both are true IMO.

There will never be scientific evidence to prove or disprove the existence of God. But as human beings, we are much more than flesh and bones, and have the ability to look at a painting and fully understand that an artist painted it. There is incredible complexity, order and beauty in every minute detail of this universe. IMO?this not only implies Creator?.it screams Creator. But?to others, it doesn't. It's a personal choice that doesn't involve scientific theories or fabricated probabilities. You speak of Occam's Razor?is not God the perfect example of this principle?

"Considering our hugely incomplete knowledge of the subject, there is certainly tons of room for a creator god to exist, but to take the stand that it is unlikely is certainly reasonable, and can be done with no twists of logic, and no subversion of science." - AGREE

Well if you're not going to spend the time to educate yourself on a topic, you should probably not try and debate on it. It's very strange that you would try to get into a discussion of Richard Dawkins' views on theism and evolution, going so far as to claim he endorses false dichotomies without consideration of options that you present, all with having absolutely no fucking clue as to what he has specifically written on it. You think the whole "maybe god just made the rules", aka. the divine watchmaker/Deism thing is a new idea? Not only is it hundreds of years old, but Dawkins wrote an entire book called "The Blind Watchmaker" on that subject among others. So yeah, there's just a small chance he's heard of your revelation before and taken it into account.

Furthermore, the two options are mutually exclusive. They only appear not to be because you are incorrectly representing them. One states that there is a creator that made the universe the way it is, the other is that there is no creator that made the universe the way it is. It would appear that you are quibbling with phrasing, but this would be another one of those cases in which had you read his extensive writing on the subject you would not have made this mistake. The second option means that there is no creator present, and he has made that abundantly clear. So again, your third option is merely a rephrasing of the first. Whether god is making everything, or just conjuring up principles, it is irrelevant. He's either the one behind it or he isn't. End of story.

As for the 'scientifically supported' thing, perhaps I misphrased it, but it should have been completely obvious that I did not mean scientific studies showed god to be improbable.(considering in this same thread I've mentioned how science can't prove that) What I should have said was that it was logically supported. Again though, I can't imagine how a rational person reading my post would think that I meant there was experimental evidence of some sort.

I'm sorry, but the reasoning is sound. We have no evidence that supports the existence of god, nor do we have any evidence that supports the existence of eternal matter and principles. The eternal matter argument requires fewer steps, requires no creator entity, and requires no anthrocentric view of existence. It is simpler, and therefore more probable. (note: probable)

 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.

Well I'm sure we can all agree that the conditions on this planet seem to be fairly rare. An observer so close to the point of perfection must stand in awe and wonderment. It must be magic.

fairly rare ?
Right now we are the only ones.
That is more than rare.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.

Google 'the anthropic principle'.

I've read it.
The topic is about as useful as scientology.

 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,571
54,467
136
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.

Google 'the anthropic principle'.

I've read it.
The topic is about as useful as scientology.

Well it offers a pretty powerful explanation for your amazement at the 'coincidence' we find ourselves in.

If you are looking for other planets with oceans, it appears that Mars once had oceans, and Europa appears to have liquid oceans and magnetic poles. So, that's up to three bodies within one solar system... and that's one solar system out of billions (or trillions). How unlikely are things looking now?
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.

Google 'the anthropic principle'.

I've read it.
The topic is about as useful as scientology.

Well it offers a pretty powerful explanation for your amazement at the 'coincidence' we find ourselves in.

If you are looking for other planets with oceans, it appears that Mars once had oceans, and Europa appears to have liquid oceans and magnetic poles. So, that's up to three bodies within one solar system... and that's one solar system out of billions (or trillions). How unlikely are things looking now?

Very very unlikely

 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.

Well I'm sure we can all agree that the conditions on this planet seem to be fairly rare. An observer so close to the point of perfection must stand in awe and wonderment. It must be magic.

fairly rare ?
Right now we are the only ones.
That is more than rare.
You both have exactly zero basis for any calculations on the probability space of the universe.

Moreover, in certain cosmologies our reality is not only probable, but inevitable.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.

Well I'm sure we can all agree that the conditions on this planet seem to be fairly rare. An observer so close to the point of perfection must stand in awe and wonderment. It must be magic.

fairly rare ?
Right now we are the only ones.
That is more than rare.
You both have exactly zero basis for any calculations on the probability space of the universe.

Moreover, in certain cosmologies our reality is not only probable, but inevitable.

Prove it
 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.
You're painting the target around the arrow and then marvelling at the bullseye.
 

mxyzptlk

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2008
1,888
0
0
I'd seen a great quote about that on some other site.. but I can't for the life of me find it so I'm just going to butcher it horribly, so hopefully the point stays intact:

Imagine a sentient puddle on the ground as it ponders the shallow depression that it rests in. It might say something like, "Wow, it's amazing to find a container that so perfectly fits my shape. This depression must surely have been designed especially for me!"
 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.

Well I'm sure we can all agree that the conditions on this planet seem to be fairly rare. An observer so close to the point of perfection must stand in awe and wonderment. It must be magic.

fairly rare ?
Right now we are the only ones.
That is more than rare.
You both have exactly zero basis for any calculations on the probability space of the universe.

Moreover, in certain cosmologies our reality is not only probable, but inevitable.

Prove it

Prove what? In a spatio-termporally unbounded universe, all probabilities approach 1. In a many-worlds cosmology, all probabilities are actual. Do some reading.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,571
54,467
136
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.

Google 'the anthropic principle'.

I've read it.
The topic is about as useful as scientology.

Well it offers a pretty powerful explanation for your amazement at the 'coincidence' we find ourselves in.

If you are looking for other planets with oceans, it appears that Mars once had oceans, and Europa appears to have liquid oceans and magnetic poles. So, that's up to three bodies within one solar system... and that's one solar system out of billions (or trillions). How unlikely are things looking now?

Very very unlikely

Strange, because Europa has an atmosphere, oceans, and an electromagnetic field. Someone on here told me that they really wanted to see more places like that. Furthermore, the observable universe has approximately 70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in it.

Considering we have one certain life supporting body in our solar system, and another one that appears to have the qualities necessary to support life, in order for you to think it's likely life exists elsewhere you only really need to think there is a 1 in 140,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance of it. Is that how unlikely you meant?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,571
54,467
136
Originally posted by: mxyzptlk
I'd seen a great quote about that on some other site.. but I can't for the life of me find it so I'm just going to butcher it horribly, so hopefully the point stays intact:

Imagine a sentient puddle on the ground as it ponders the shallow depression that it rests in. It might say something like, "Wow, it's amazing to find a container that so perfectly fits my shape. This depression must surely have been designed especially for me!"

It's a Douglas Adams quote, and you were pretty close.
 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,596
19
81
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.
We've got a pretty damned small sample size with just a single solar system to look at.

Second:
- Venus has an atmosphere that's much denser than ours.
- Jupiter has a HUGE magnetic field which is very powerful, as do the other gas giants.
- One of Jupiter's moons, Europa, has evidence of a vast subsurface ocean, which may have 2-3 times the volume of all of Earth's oceans combined. The problem there is, we don't have the technology or the funds to send robots there to drill or burrow through the thick icy crust to explore what's beneath. All we have now are various scans, including radar scans, performed by the Galileo and Voyager probes.
- Saturn's moon Enceladus has a coating of nearly pure water ice, and it is the most reflective object known in the solar system.
- Ceres, a large asteroid, also has a lot of water ice in its crust.
- Observations of stars keep finding more and more planets or planetary discs. It looks like stars with planetary systems are the norm, and not the exception.


Conceivable that some alien race designed us? Sure. More conceivable than any deity we've come up with.
Evidence of it? Not that I've seen.


Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Google 'the anthropic principle'.
I've read it.
The topic is about as useful as scientology.
And then there's the puddle story - a puddle finds itself in a shallow hole in the ground. The hole seems to fit the puddle precisely. The puddle concludes that, "surely this hole was made just for me!"
That's how ID looks at things - backwards.

Edit: That's the price of long posts, too much stuff gets posted in the meantime.

 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
Originally posted by: Jeff7

Conceivable that some alien race designed us? Sure. More conceivable than any deity we've come up with.
Evidence of it? Not that I've seen.
Panspermia. That's my guess.



 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.

Well I'm sure we can all agree that the conditions on this planet seem to be fairly rare. An observer so close to the point of perfection must stand in awe and wonderment. It must be magic.

fairly rare ?
Right now we are the only ones.
That is more than rare.
You both have exactly zero basis for any calculations on the probability space of the universe.

Moreover, in certain cosmologies our reality is not only probable, but inevitable.

Prove it

Prove what? In a spatio-termporally unbounded universe, all probabilities approach 1. In a many-worlds cosmology, all probabilities are actual. Do some reading.

Prove it, don't quote what others have told you. Prove it.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.

Google 'the anthropic principle'.

I've read it.
The topic is about as useful as scientology.

Well it offers a pretty powerful explanation for your amazement at the 'coincidence' we find ourselves in.

If you are looking for other planets with oceans, it appears that Mars once had oceans, and Europa appears to have liquid oceans and magnetic poles. So, that's up to three bodies within one solar system... and that's one solar system out of billions (or trillions). How unlikely are things looking now?

Very very unlikely

Strange, because Europa has an atmosphere, oceans, and an electromagnetic field. Someone on here told me that they really wanted to see more places like that. Furthermore, the observable universe has approximately 70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in it.

Considering we have one certain life supporting body in our solar system, and another one that appears to have the qualities necessary to support life, in order for you to think it's likely life exists elsewhere you only really need to think there is a 1 in 140,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance of it. Is that how unlikely you meant?

Can you prove that ?
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,674
6,246
126
Yup. We have knowledge of 1 Solar system of 7(?) Planets. Not much of a basis to be drawing conclusive proof of Earth is the only suitable Planet in existance. There are probably beings on millions of other Planets making the same claims of exclusivity though.
 

mxyzptlk

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2008
1,888
0
0
Originally posted by: Modelworks

Can you prove that ?

Why do you try so hard to not understand?

edit: I mean, are you doubting the number of stars in the universe? (a lot) The percentage of stars that have planets? (most of them)

 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
Originally posted by: Modelworks

Prove it, don't quote what others have told you. Prove it.
Prove what? I think you are just grasping at anything you can to avoid confronting the facts. What I've given you are facts. They can be found corroborated by doing some reading. I'm not gonna do your homework for you. If you have reason to dispute the facts, then we can certainly debate them.

Other than that you're just being a disingenuous douchenozzle.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,571
54,467
136
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: eskimospy

Strange, because Europa has an atmosphere, oceans, and an electromagnetic field. Someone on here told me that they really wanted to see more places like that. Furthermore, the observable universe has approximately 70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in it.

Considering we have one certain life supporting body in our solar system, and another one that appears to have the qualities necessary to support life, in order for you to think it's likely life exists elsewhere you only really need to think there is a 1 in 140,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance of it. Is that how unlikely you meant?

Can you prove that ?

Prove what? Seventy sextillion stars is science's best estimate at this time for the observable universe. Seems like a reasonable figure to use especially as the primary concern is that we are underestimating the total number of stars.

We are certain Europa has an atmosphere and EM field (albeit weak ones), the liquid ocean inside of it is not a certainty, but the available evidence says that it does. Even if you decide to discount Europa, there are still seventy sextillion stars out there. That's a lot of chances for life to show up. There are a lot of scientists out there that view finding extraterrestrial life not so much a matter of if, but when.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt
Originally posted by: Modelworks

Prove it, don't quote what others have told you. Prove it.
Prove what? I think you are just grasping at anything you can to avoid confronting the facts. What I've given you are facts. They can be found corroborated by doing some reading. I'm not gonna do your homework for you. If you have reason to dispute the facts, then we can certainly debate them.

Other than that you're just being a disingenuous douchenozzle.

No what you have given are theories. Not facts.
 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,596
19
81
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Can you prove that ?
Just note, lack of proof doesn't mean it is untrue.

You lack proof that I am wearing pants.

Am I wearing pants?

Prove it.


Right now, our technology prevents us from venturing out and proving certain things. We have to go based on hypotheses and theories in the meantime.

Hell, there's a lot of stuff we can't "prove," but damn, the theories sure as hell do an awesome and consistent job of explaining why things happen.

But if you want a good example of a hypothesis matching up almost exactly with reality, look at the COBE mission. Prediction: The Universe was once very small and very hot. If it was, we would observe a background blackbody emission spectrum of yadda-yadda-yadda.
COBE goes up, has a look around. The data it returns is very nearly a precise match, with a very tiny statistical error spread.



So stop with the "just a theory" BS. As is usually said to that, gravity is also "just a theory." Go jump off a bridge.
The theory says you'll fall to your death.
But it's just a theory.

 

Praxis1452

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,197
0
0
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I lean towards the ID side mixed in with evolution.
I just find it a really amazing coincidence that all the conditions for life just happened to occur on this planet. Things we have seen on no other planets , like the EM field that protects us from dangerous radiation.
I don't see why it is inconceivable to some that there might be a race out there that is millions of years more advanced than us that had a role in our development. Can I prove it ? Of course not. But I would find the evolution only debate a lot more credible if there were other planets with oceans, or atmospheres, or even a EM field.

Google 'the anthropic principle'.

I've read it.
The topic is about as useful as scientology.

Well it offers a pretty powerful explanation for your amazement at the 'coincidence' we find ourselves in.

If you are looking for other planets with oceans, it appears that Mars once had oceans, and Europa appears to have liquid oceans and magnetic poles. So, that's up to three bodies within one solar system... and that's one solar system out of billions (or trillions). How unlikely are things looking now?

Very very unlikely

Strange, because Europa has an atmosphere, oceans, and an electromagnetic field. Someone on here told me that they really wanted to see more places like that. Furthermore, the observable universe has approximately 70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in it.

Considering we have one certain life supporting body in our solar system, and another one that appears to have the qualities necessary to support life, in order for you to think it's likely life exists elsewhere you only really need to think there is a 1 in 140,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance of it. Is that how unlikely you meant?

Can you prove that ?

Can you prove to me that you exist? I want proof. Go into my head and move my grey matter around.

It's a simple mathematical model. Like saying, prove to me 1+1=2.

edit: Are you nihilist? If not, why? And then prove your reasoning.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: mxyzptlk
Originally posted by: Modelworks

Can you prove that ?

Why do you try so hard to not understand?

edit: I mean, are you doubting the number of stars in the universe? (a lot) The percentage of stars that have planets? (most of them)


No the number of planets that all have the condition for life and have developed life from it.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |