Splinz's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Splinz's Profile › Splinz's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 (of 152 pages)
 Politics › Re: No Weapon Was Found In Dasuki’s Guest House – DSS by Splinz(m): 2:44pm On May 20, 2016 |
SMH for this government. |
| Politics › Re: El-rufai Is Nothing But A Coward And An Alcoholic- Shehu Sani by Splinz(m): 2:33pm On May 20, 2016 |
“El-Rufai is a bad and rotten egg in the APC. He knelt down for Atiku to become BPE chair and later betrayed him. He knelt down for Obj to become a minister and later betrayed him. He knelt down for Buhari to be governor of which later he will betray him. Fear El-Rufai whenever he kneels down before you.Word. 3 Likes 1 Share |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 2:03pm On May 20, 2016 |
The Amazing Human Eye The balance of this discourse contains a series of brief examinations of various examples reflecting God’s creative genius and bear testimony to a literal, divine creation. Each of these miracles of engineering defies atheists and evolutionists! Think carefully about what you are reading and ask yourself if even one of them could have evolved. Begin with the human eye. This mechanism is spectacularly complex and is a particularly inspiring testimony to the greatness of God’s supreme intelligence. Here are three statements from Dr. David N. Menton. The first represents the magnitude of difficulty in having the human eye evolve to its current state of extraordinary design and complexity: “The most amazing component of the camera eye is its ‘film’ or retina. This light sensitive layer, which lines the back of the eye ball, is thinner than a sheet of Saran Wrap and is vastly more sensitive to a wider range of light than any man-made film. The best man-made film can handle a range of 1,000-to-one. By comparison, the human retina can handle a dynamic range of light of 10 billion-to-one (or 10 million times more) and can sense as little as a single photon of light in the dark! In bright daylight, the retina bleaches out and turns its ‘volume control’ way down so as not to overload. “The light sensitive cells of the retina are like an extremely complex high gain amplifier. There are over 10 million such cells in the retina and they are packed together with a density of 200,000 (per millimeter) in the highly sensitive fovea. These photoreceptor cells have a very high rate of metabolism and must completely replace themselves about every 7 days! If you look at a very bright light such as the sun, they immediately burn out but are rapidly replaced in most cases. Because the retina is thinner than the wavelength of visible light it is totally transparent. Each of these minute photoreceptor cells is vastly more complex than the most sophisticated man-made computer.” Now notice: “The evolutionist Dr. Ernest Mayer once said: It is a considerable strain on one’s credulity to assume that finely balanced systems such as certain sense organs (the eye of vertebrates or the bird’s feather) could be improved by random mutations.” Even Darwin once said that the very thought of the complexity of the eye gave him chills. Here is another reason Darwin said this. This quote, while inspiring, certainly is chilling: “It has been estimated that 10 billion calculations occur every second in the retina before the light image even gets to the brain! It is sobering to compare this performance to the most powerful manmade computer. In an article published in the computer magazine, Byte (April 1985), Dr. John Stevens said: ‘To simulate 10 milliseconds of the complete processing of even a single nerve cell from the retina would require the solution of about 500 simultaneous non-linear differential equations one hundred times and would take at least several minutes of processing time on a Cray supercomputer. Keeping in mind that there are 10 million or more such cells interacting with each other in complex ways it would take a minimum of a hundred years of Cray time to simulate what takes place in your eye many times every second’” (Dr. David N. Menton, Ph.D., The Eye, Missouri Assoc. for Creation, Inc.—emphasis mine). You are left to draw your own conclusions about how such a marvelous organism—the human eye—could have evolved. No wonder my own optometrist told me that he believes that the eye did not evolve. He understands that it could not! It was “invented” by the Great Inventor. Okay. What's up people........? Later. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 1:48pm On May 20, 2016 |
You know, it amazes how you could believe science with emphasis on the bolded but not agree with same science on its evolutionary theories.Simple. I wholeheartedly agrees with true science that is backed up with facts and proofs! As for evolutionary theories, it has been proven that it is completely built on falsehood and blatant lies! There's just no way I'll deceive myself to accept what is not! Now let me ask you, if there exist trillions of planets, with billions of stars and millions of galaxies. Sincerely, does it seems rational to still hold on the the belief that we are the only center of attraction in the whole universe, the only significant planet, the only intelligent beings in the whole universeGood question. Lets take atheists as an example. This set of people don't believe in God or gods, in fact, anything supernatural. On the other hand, I'm on the side of the divide. So, I think these questions is best suited for people like atheists, so they could tell us if there exist any other thing and its name, that is superior or more intelligent than man. Doesn't that make the creator a wasteful personality?Whatever was created has its purposes and usefulness. Let me shock you. Why Do You Exist? |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 8:57pm On May 19, 2016 |
The Fossil Record Gap Evolutionists once referred more often to evidence from the “fossil record.” Does such evidence exist? Do bones and artifacts from millions of years ago tell a story—offer convincing proof—that man evolved from simple organisms? What is the truth of the scientific record? Remember, we want facts—proof—not theories requiring faith to believe them! This quote, from Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in London, in a letter to L. Sunderland, summarized the “fossil problem”: “…I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustrations of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them…Yet Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils…I will lay it on the line—there is not one such fossil for which one could make a water tight argument.” Some Fossils In the 1920s, a single tooth was found in Western Nebraska at the Snake Creek quarry. Scientists came forward offering this tooth as proof that evolution had occurred and purported it to be a “missing link.” Because of where it was discovered, the human-like sketch drawn around it was called “Nebraska Man.” Much “to do” was made of this discovery. It was big news. Evolutionists rejoiced. But a funny thing happened on the way to the theory of evolution. Five years later, someone decided to ask a farmer his opinion of the tooth. His answer was to identify it as a “pig’s tooth!” More excavation at the site of the “find” proved that the rest of the skeleton did, indeed, represent some kind of peccary (pig). It is often bones, or even bone fragments (and some of these have been determined to be hoaxes) that cause evolutionists to assert that important “links” from the fossil record have been discovered. Merely because someone found a piece of bone, sophisticated artist renderings are then presented, assigned names and offered as convincing visual proof that evolution occurred. “Orce Man” was based on what turned out to be the skullcap of a donkey. “Ramapithecus Man” was simply a baboon skull. “Piltdown Man” was a hoax and “Neanderthal Man” was determined to be severely bow-legged simply because he had rickets. He was assuredly not proof from the fossil record of a half-ape, half-man transitional creature. There is a desperation in the thinking and actions of many evolutionary scientists. The following quotes demonstrate their approach: “A five million year old piece of bone that was thought to be the collarbone of a human like creature is actually part of a dolphin rib…The problem with a lot of anthropologists is that they want so much to find a hominid [human] that any scrap of bone becomes a hominid bone” (Dr. Tim White, anthropologist, Univ. of California, Berkeley, New Scientist, April 28, 1983, p. 199). “In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to ‘bend’ their observations to fit in with it” (H.S. Lipson, FRS, Prof. Of Physics, Univ. of Manchester, UK, ‘A Physicist Looks at Evolution,’ Physics Bulletin, Vol. 31, 1980, p. 138). Here are the facts. Absolutely no transitional forms exist anywhere in the fossil record. While evolutionists will suggest that it took “50 million years for a fish to evolve into an amphibian,” the simple truth is that there are no transitional fossil forms to prove this. There are no creatures found that evidence partial fins, partial feet or partially evolved brains, legs, eyes, organs or other body parts. The following comes from the “father” of evolutionary thinking: “Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?” (The Origin of Species, Charles Darwin, ch. 6.) Consider a statement regarding how bone fragments are supposed to represent entire human skeletons within various stages of the fossil record. Dr. Leakey, considered the most famous fossil anthropologist in the world, said that the skull of his famous discovery, “Lucy” (known as Australopithecus afarensis), is so incomplete that most of it is “imagination made of plaster of paris.” He admitted that no firm conclusions could be made about what species she was, even though she was assigned the age of 3.5 to 4 million years old. I have personally seen a photograph of her “skeleton,” and it is meaningless. The front cover of a well-known national news magazine showed a picture of an ape’s head accompanying an article entitled “How Apes Became Human.” The article was a pitiful attempt to first connect a toe bone to other bones found ten miles away from it, and then to depict them as proof of evolution. It speaks of evolution as a foregone conclusion. The article was filled with uncertain phrases like “close to answering,” “what appears to be,” “people have speculated,” “we are suggesting,” “still something of a mystery,” “probably,” “about,” “presumably,” “maybe,” etc. These phrases are endless. Yet the artwork and diagrams make the flimsy, speculative “evidence” look like absolute proof. The reader is even left with the impression that the writers were themselves uncertain and uncomfortable. Mixed with baseless assumptions, the artwork lends credibility through sensationalism, giving it “sale ability.” Consider! There are no links from plants to animals, reptiles to birds and mammals, etc. The fossil record shows that animals appear suddenly. When this was recognized, the whole theory of “micro-evolution” collapsed, and evolutionists admitted as much. They then decided that possibly the fossil record could best be described as indicating “macro-evolution,” sometimes referred to as “punctuated equilibrium” or “the hopeful monster theory.” This ludicrous idea suggests a reptile could suddenly lay an egg, which would hatch a bird. So many people seem willing to fall for ridiculous ideas because they have been told throughout their lives that evolution is a fact and assume that it cannot be wrong if “everyone believes it.” One source admitted, “That living things are suited for their environment better explains the fact that they were created for it not that they evolved into it” (Origins?, Ranganathan, B.G.). After all is said and done, the fossil record has never revealed what evolutionists have hoped for. The record gives distinct evidence of one fact—sudden, special creation of all life in a fully-formed condition! To believe anything else is to be dishonest with the evidence. Alright, lets stop for talks. The journey continues............... 1 Like |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 8:25pm On May 19, 2016 |
Edybleketara:Oh thanks...... actually, I'm not stressed. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 8:23pm On May 19, 2016 |
chistev12:Yeah, I'll write on that God that's responsible for all creation. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 8:17pm On May 19, 2016 |
Weah96:Do not think that you've made any sense all along. Instead of countering my arguments constructively, all you do is to throw tantrum. Why don't you prove your worth by answering this, "Who or what created your mind?" 1 Like |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 8:05pm On May 19, 2016 |
chistev12:Not over yet. When I'm done, I'll officially announce it. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 7:37pm On May 19, 2016 |
Edybleketara:Well done bro. |
| Politics › Re: What Will President Buhari Celebrate On Democracy Day? by Splinz(m): 7:33pm On May 19, 2016 |
Of course he will celebrate his uncommon failed leadership. 2 Likes |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 7:10pm On May 19, 2016 |
One Great Step Further Consider what we have discussed about the universe and its contents—including stars, planets, galaxies, plants, animals, humans and the human mind! Assume for a moment that you have all power to create whatever you wish. Do you think that you could have created this much beauty, majesty, design, size, precision of engineering and magnificence on your own, with no help from one single additional person? Remember, you would have no pattern to copy. You would be “on your own.” Would you be able to design approximately one trillion galaxies, each containing an average of 100 billion stars—with no pattern to copy as you did this? Would you think to create light and cause it to travel at 186,000 miles per second? Could you think to make sound move at 660 miles per hour? Could you create every kind of atom known to science and include every sub-atomic particle within them? Would you then think you possess the ability to merge various atoms into complex molecules able to serve a myriad of indescribably complicated purposes? Would you think yourself able to design millions of plants—many of which are utterly interdependent upon one another? Would you then be up to the task of designing, without a single pattern to follow, several million animals and insects, which are not only perfectly interdependent with one another but also interdependent with, and dependent upon, the entire plant world? Could you then put all of the food, for both plants and animals, in place, so that they would be perfectly sustained throughout whatever time you had allotted for their existence? I could go on and on, but you see the point. Now be careful! Just as you do not want to insult yourself by believing that your mind is a product of dumb luck, be sure that you do not insult God by suggesting that all of the universe and its contents could just happen into existence—entirely by itself! If there are ignorant, foolish atheists willing to believe that this could all occur on its own, then honest, intelligent people would never believe such folly, simply because ignorant men assert it! Through reason and sheer plainness of logic, we now have absolute PROOF that only a Great Being of Superior Intelligence could stand as the Designer and Architect of the entire universe and all complex life within it—including the pinnacle of His creation, your human mind! Alright guys. Lets savour this one. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 6:31pm On May 19, 2016 |
According to New Scientists: " an increasing number of scientists, most particularly a growing number of evolutionists... Argue that Darwinian evolutionary theory is no genuine scientific theory at all... Many of the critics have the highest intellectual credentials" |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 5:11pm On May 19, 2016 |
otemanuduno:You got me  with the boldface. Thanks for your contribution. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 5:02pm On May 19, 2016*. Modified: 6:33pm On May 19, 2016 |
All proofs indicate dat its impossible for such God to exist by itself. God is too complex to just come about by itselfYou think so, brother? Okay, I believe you. But you see, I don't share this same view with you. Perhaps, it's because I know Him that much. So, lets do it this way. I'll step aside for now. Take the center-stage, and educate us on why and how God is complex. (A round of applause for him................................................) |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 4:54pm On May 19, 2016 |
. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 4:23pm On May 19, 2016*. Modified: 5:06pm On May 19, 2016 |
SirWere:Sorry, I don't think you're getting it. In my own school, we have no regard for empty theories. Rather, we deal with FACTS AND PROOFS! |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 3:56pm On May 19, 2016 |
The Limits of Your Creative Power Now think about what mankind has been able to produce. He can build houses, telephones, trains, automobiles, planes, rockets, computers, fax machines and other sophisticated devices that are practically limitless in complexity and usefulness. However, all this creative genius has a simple limit. No man, or group of men, you and I included, can create anything as marvelous as the human mind. Everything that man creates is inferior to his own mind. Try to think of a single thing that has ever been created by men that is superior to the minds who created it. You will not think of anything. Here is the question: Who or what created your mind—and you? King David said, “…for I am fearfully and wonderfully made” (Psa. 139:14). Surely this is most true of the human brain. Be honest with yourself. Can you possibly believe that some kind of blind, dumb power or force—of less intelligence than yourself, or of no intelligence—created your mind? Remember, you can create nothing superior to your mind. So, only a greater mind could create your mind. Do not insult yourself by suggesting that your extraordinary creative powers of intelligence, reason, logic, thought, volition and ingenuity are a product of mere dumb luck! Alright friends. Time for a short break...... lets hear your comments. |
| Politics › Re: ASUU And Non-Academic Staff Of UNIZIK Protest - Photos by Splinz(m): 3:41pm On May 19, 2016 |
SMH for this government. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 3:00pm On May 19, 2016 |
Edybleketara:Brother, there's nothing like subtly eluding your questions or being hypocritical. We're dealing with facts and proofs here, it's a serious issue! Remember, " Only God has Life inherent in Himself. This is, after all, what makes Him God. No one created God, because He has Life inherent in Himself. But is this God merely some kind of blind power, some kind of dumb “first force?” Let’s reason together. We are still reasoning... |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 2:32pm On May 19, 2016 |
The Extraordinary Human Mind Stop and think! Consider all of the works of nature around you—both on Earth and in the heavens. First, consider the many different kinds of planets, stars and galaxies. Each is its own marvel. Second, consider all the species of plants on Earth today. There are millions, diverse in color, shape, size, beauty, length of life, etc. I have spent much of my life studying and planting many kinds of plants. The brilliance of their various designs and purposes never ceases to amaze me! I am more fascinated with these living plants, than with stars and other objects throughout the heavens. A side note should be considered at this point. All of the food that exists on Earth today is perfectly designed for either human or animal consumption. It is constructed so that it contains just the right amounts of different elements necessary to sustain various life forms. Every time man tries to alter or improve food, he seems to pollute, ruin, devitalize, inject with poison, genetically re-engineer, or in some manner reduce its perfection into something inferior to what he started with. If mankind could just leave food alone, and eat it as God created it, sickness, disease and every form of nutrition-related human infirmity would disappear. The germination, growth, development and maturation of plants into the many kinds of food, available just to human beings, represents its own series of miracles far too complex to recount here. It could command its own book just to explore it beyond even the most superficial overview. But think! Who is more intelligent? God—who made perfect food, or men—who find every possible way to alter and degrade it before consuming it? Take the time to ponder this question. Third, consider the nearly one million different kinds of creatures (plus the estimated several million additional kinds of insects). Because these creatures are animate, they are even more marvelous and fascinating than is the world of plants. Their diversity in color, shape, size, beauty, length of life, etc., is comparable to plants. What is the point? As fascinating, marvelous, beautiful and amazing as are all the things described here, surely nothing is as amazing as the HUMAN MIND. It is the absolute pinnacle of all living organisms. None can doubt this. Okay. I'll be back shortly... |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 2:14pm On May 19, 2016*. Modified: 3:06pm On May 19, 2016 |
Weah96:Good! Now you understand that there's nothing like blind luck or chance in what is known as life today. Shows we're making progress. However, your problem has always been evidence that the Bible God created all things. Bro, it is not as if you asked amiss. You have a right to this evidence if you're to believe in this God who actually wants to be known when He said, "Prove all things". But as I've been telling you, is it not my aim to prove that the Bible God created all things here, that is entirely another subject on its own. I'm here to prove that yes indeed, the universe and all lives didn't happen by chance! Do not worry yourself, what you seek will be provided. I'll personally call your attention to it when I'm finished with this very subject we're dealing on. I don't give out half-baked answers to crucial questions, which is why I insist on rounding up this topic first. Cheers... |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 10:32am On May 19, 2016*. Modified: 2:24pm On May 19, 2016 |
joe4christ:Surprisingly, you guys are now interested in the Bible. Well, it's a good thing all the same. Yes, it's been proven that life can't come from inanimate things, but life from life. Now, considering GENESIS 2:7, I don't know if it's an oversight on your part or sheer mischief. Okay, lets reason it together now: "Then the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground and "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life", and the man became a living being". Brother, is it rocket science to understand from this statement that Adam only became a living being after God breathed on him the breath of life? Interestingly enough, we can liken the creation process of man to an analogy of a car. In that, when a car has been assembled or fixed with inanimate things, it only comes to life or usefulness when it is supply with fuel! Please, lets not derail the thread. As I've already stated that the Bible is kept aside in this discourse for a reason. Alright! More updates coming.... |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 9:15am On May 19, 2016 |
Edybleketara:Where have you ever learned that God is a THEORY and a FIGMENT of imagination? Certainly, not my own God who said, "Prove All Things", and this ofcourse means including Himself. Get something straight here! I'm not a religious person; but a CHRISTIAN you've never known. Christianity is a way of life. Now, in this walk with Christ, don't assume we walk only by faith (even though faith is important), but know that we also deal with all knowledge known to man. Yes, we don't take anything for granted, but go out there to gather proofs and facts! That's why it is on the TRUTH that I stand! You think you're more scientist than me? You think you're more logical than me? You think you're more observatory than me? You think you've carried more research than me? If yes to all these questions, then you certainly need to think again. And guess what? True science agrees with God! Alright great partner, our journey continues...... |
| Christianity Etc › Re: For The Sake Of The Kids And Future Generation by Splinz(m): 1:05am On May 19, 2016 |
amicable09:I know you sincerely wanna make him believe in God. But note, you can never do it on your own. Decker you see today could be the next Paul tomorrow, if God so will. For now, he has his own wisdom and you have yours. So, let it be. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 12:13am On May 19, 2016 |
appsdoubra:Thanks bro. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 12:06am On May 19, 2016 |
Edybleketara:I don't get it, bro. Have I been quoting the Bible all along, or strictly science based? The Bible is kept aside in this discourse for a reason- that we may squarely face this question of Creation vs Evolution in all knowledge that's available to man. It should be noted that I'm in no way here to mock anyone beliefs. However, if you feel that I've discredited your Evolution Theory, you may as well bear with me, as it wasn't my intention. This thread has a sole aim- to prove the existence of God. As per how Adam came about, it only means you're not even familiar with the Bible after all, as a first time GENESIS reader will readily see the answer you seek. It has been proven that life can never come from inanimate things, but life from life. Since inanimate things can't produce life, the only plausible answer for Adam's being is God, who has life inherent in Himself. Yes, if we're to believe that life must come from life. Upcoming updates promises to be very interesting and exciting. Cheers... |
| Christianity Etc › Re: This Is Exactly How The Universe Came Into Existence by Splinz(m): 10:52pm On May 18, 2016 |
otemanuduno:Funny. You really sound naive indeed. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Does God Exist? by Splinz(op): 8:59pm On May 18, 2016 |
Life Requires a LIFEGIVER What about the presence of all life on Earth today? Where did it come from? How did it get here? The Bible states that God created all life during the first six days of the creation week of Genesis 1. Is this true, or did life come into existence by itself? As with Uranium 238, and its provable moment of beginning, the great pattern of all life is that it can only come from other pre-existing life. This is called the Law of Biogenesis. All first-year biology students know it. When examining tiny organisms, such as protozoa and bacteria, it can be demonstrated that life only comes from life. There are many kinds of life, but each continues to reproduce the same kind over and over. This is indisputable. Life can never come from inanimate (non-living) objects. Evolutionists theorize that inanimate objects, under certain unknown circumstances in the misty past, somehow spontaneously gave birth to very primitive life forms. This presents enormous problems for anyone familiar with the nature and complexity of simple cells. Biologists understand that all cells can only come from pre-existing cells. Here is why. Cells, even in their simplest and most rudimentary form, are extremely complex. Consider: “The simplest organism capable of independent life, the prokargote bacterial cell, is a masterpiece of miniaturized complexity which makes a spaceship seem rather low-tech” (Darwin on Trial, Philip Johnson, p. 102). The next source is equally powerful in explaining both the complexity of the cell and its origin: “The cell needs all its basic parts with their various functions, for survival; therefore, if the cell had evolved, it would have meant that billions of parts would have had to come into existence at the same time, in the same place, and then simultaneously come together in a precise order” (Origins?, Ranganathan, B.G., p. 15). Will skeptics ignore the truth that it is impossible to have life without a LIFEGIVER? Only God has Life inherent in Himself. This is, after all, what makes Him God. No one created God, because He has Life inherent in Himself. But is this God merely some kind of blind power, some kind of dumb “first force?” Let’s reason together. Alright, lets hear what the evolutionists got to tell us. Remember, the journey continues....... |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Dear Catholics...defend Your Faith. by Splinz(m): 7:27pm On May 18, 2016 |
The Bible is the standard that measures your walk with God. Open it and see if it does agree with your Church practices and doctrines. |
| Politics › Re: RIP Subsidy: Youths Bearing Coffin Celebrate The "Death Of Subsidy" by Splinz(m): 6:38pm On May 18, 2016 |
Deluded lot. |
| Politics › Re: France Returns Artifact Exported From Nigeria Illegally. See Photo by Splinz(m): 6:35pm On May 18, 2016 |
Luizkid:Lol......... ain't you happy for the return of god of your forefathers? 1 Like |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 (of 152 pages)