What's new

R&D neglected in Muslim countries

The Koran puts so much emphasis on scientific research and inquiry that no real authority can challenge.
If that is true, then why is the muslim world so far behind?

Never mind...Because the muslims are not following the Quran...Same old circular argument...

Koran explained it better; in the Koran it is said that humans were created from clay and then from sperm.
Since humans are intelligent animals, than this applies to all the other animals.
Koran goes further and explains about botanic and planets and galaxies. it covers everything from the microcosm (The atom and smaller particles) to the macrocosm (The creation of the Universe, the big bang, the movements of planets and galaxies and more).
Right...From clay...
 
You never studied in any top Western institution , did you?

Dumbo little girl , you are on an international forum and not on any bhartimata-shuppa-phowaa.com ... Iranian students , as a group , are WAY more smarter than your bhartis ... Do you really want to compare your country's technological exports with say Malaysia or Turkey? As far as I know , Iranians used two-staged rocket to send their satellite into space...tell your DRDO talented guys to do THAT under the sanctions Iran is facing from over ten years now....

Don't try to act as if you know something.

loll i am surprised to see the pathetic general knowledge of urz. i guess its true americans cant even locate their own country on the map, how come they will know abt india. loll

currently i am in Canada studying electrical engineering at waterloo uni(1st year).
first of all, i dont care how smart iranian students.

when india built its rocket it was under huge technological denials. we were even denied cryogenic engines. our rockets are 4 staged unlike the tiny iranian rockets. iran can only launch mini satellites 600km above earth. india has been to moon and has capacity to reach anywhere in the solar system. we can launch heavy satellites. plz dont compare us with them or anyone in muslim world.

malaysia and turkey have no technological exports. india is the 5th largest spender on r&d and will double or tripple the expenditure from 2013 according to our government making us 3rd largest in the world.

beta agar shakal achi na ho na to baatein ache kar loo.
thanks
 
Evolution is mentioned in Quran and has been described by many Muslim scientists.

Evolution in Quran:

Pharmacy cialis » Approved Canadian Healthcare.

It's very long but clears a lot of things. There is nothing in Quran that says anything against evolution. But the mechanism of Natural Selection is still a debatable issue and it's not given in Quran.

Muhammadan Theory of Evolution:

In the zoology field of biology, Muslim biologists developed theories on evolution which were widely taught in medieval Islamic schools. John William Draper, a contemporary of Charles Darwin, considered the "Mohammedan theory of evolution" to be developed "much farther than we are disposed to do, extending them even to inorganic or mineral things." According to al-Khazini, ideas on evolution were widespread among "common people" in the Islamic world by the 12th century.[188]

The first Muslim biologist to develop a theory on evolution was al-Jahiz (781-869). He wrote on the effects of the environment on the likelihood of an animal to survive, and he first described the struggle for existence.[189][190] Al-Jahiz was also the first to discuss food chains,[191] and was also an early adherent of environmental determinism, arguing that the environment can determine the physical characteristics of the inhabitants of a certain community and that the origins of different human skin colors is the result of the environment.
 
Evolution is mentioned in Quran and has been described by many Muslim scientists.

Evolution in Quran:

Pharmacy cialis » Approved Canadian Healthcare.

It's very long but clears a lot of things. There is nothing in Quran that says anything against evolution. But the mechanism of Natural Selection is still a debatable issue and it's not given in Quran.

Muhammadan Theory of Evolution:

In the zoology field of biology, Muslim biologists developed theories on evolution which were widely taught in medieval Islamic schools. John William Draper, a contemporary of Charles Darwin, considered the "Mohammedan theory of evolution" to be developed "much farther than we are disposed to do, extending them even to inorganic or mineral things." According to al-Khazini, ideas on evolution were widespread among "common people" in the Islamic world by the 12th century.[188]

The first Muslim biologist to develop a theory on evolution was al-Jahiz (781-869). He wrote on the effects of the environment on the likelihood of an animal to survive, and he first described the struggle for existence.[189][190] Al-Jahiz was also the first to discuss food chains,[191] and was also an early adherent of environmental determinism, arguing that the environment can determine the physical characteristics of the inhabitants of a certain community and that the origins of different human skin colors is the result of the environment.
No...Evolution is not mentioned in the Quran. The Quranic quotes are strained to the fullest to fit modern science and those did the straining turned around and claimed credit for the Quran the theory. You did not brought on anything new. If what you say is true, then show everyone reputable scientific researches that used the Quran as a reference.
 
No need to put up too much upon religion. Can not talk about other muslim nations but for Pakistan I think they were going fine till 80s but since hen everything changed. Abdus Salam was a great scientist and He should had been brought back in Pakistan but dont now why it did not happen. May be govt was too busy in other things.
 
No...Evolution is not mentioned in the Quran. The Quranic quotes are strained to the fullest to fit modern science and those did the straining turned around and claimed credit for the Quran the theory. You did not brought on anything new. If what you say is true, then show everyone reputable scientific researches that used the Quran as a reference.

Rudimentary theories of evolution were present from the times of Greeks. Where did I say that Quran takes the credit for theory of evolution? I said Quran mentions it.

Somewhere at the beginning of the third chapter (para) of Quran, there is mentioning of two types of verses:

1. Muhkimats (From 'Hukm' = Order) these are the commandments that are explained in easy language and form the guidance to lead a successful life. We are told to follow those 'Muhkimats' which are written in easy and understandable language.

2. Mutashbihat (From 'Tashbih' = Simile or metaphor) these are allegorical verses of Quran and can have meanings which only 'Men of Understanding' can comprehend. That means somebody with a thinking mind (not necessarily a Muslim). These are the verses, according to some thinkers, whose meanings we will understand with the passage of time. There is no need to understand them immediately, because, it's not required. For example, the story of Adam and satan which is very allegorical; so, is the story of creation (of all things).

Quran was written for people from all epochs and from every walk of life; not just for this day and age and for a person with sound understanding of Life Sciences. So, it is uses simple language and metaphors to convey the message; Quranic quotes are not strained they are interpreted.
 
Islam is the first monotheistic religion and the last, it pre-dates Christianism and Judaism, besides all the other religions you are pointing to were inspired from the same area where Islam was born.
This on its own proves what I have said.

Please do your search on these matters before answering. Then we shall continue our discussion.

Wow. You think Islam is older than Christianity. I will stop right there.
 
Wow. You think Islam is older than Christianity. I will stop right there.

The proof is Abraham, if you read the Koran you will understand it.

If that is true, then why is the muslim world so far behind?

Never mind...Because the muslims are not following the Quran...Same old circular argument...


Right...From clay...

Who told you "so far behind"?
You seem to have forgotten Colonialism!

From clay precisely and a drop of a warm liquid.

Koran says:
Then inquire of them: Is it they who are stronger in structure or other things We have created? We created them from sticky clay. (Qur'an, 37:11)

When the human body is examined today, it may be discovered that many elements present on the earth are also to be found in the body. Living tissues contain 95% carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus and sulphur, with a total of 26 different elements. In another verse of the Qur'an we are told:

We created man from an extract of clay. (Qur'an, 23:12)

The Arabic word "sulala," translated as "extract" in the verse, means "representative example, essence." As we have seen, the information revealed in the Qur'an 1,400 years ago confirms what modern science tells us-the fact that the same elements are employed in human creation as those found in the soil.


The Scientific Hypothesis

Two of the crucial components for the origin of life - genetic material and cell membranes - could have been introduced to one another by a lump of clay, new experiments have shown.

The study of montmorillonite clay, by Martin Hanczyc, Shelly Fujikawa and Jack Szostak at the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, revealed it can sharply accelerate the formation of membranous fluid-filled sacs.

These vesicles also grow and undergo a simple form of division, giving them the properties of primitive cells. Previous work has shown that the same simple mineral can help assemble the genetic material RNA from simpler chemicals. "Interestingly, the clay also gets internalised in the vesicles," says Leslie Orgel, an origin of life expert at the Salk Institute for Biological Sciences in San Diego, California. "So this work is quite nice in that it finds a connection between the mechanism that creates RNA and encloses it in a membrane."

Inherit, mutate, evolve

The genesis of genetic material and the emergence of cell structure are hot areas of research, but until now the two had not connected. The birth of genetic material was clearly crucial for life to take on its unique abilities to inherit, mutate and evolve.

And membranes were key to the physiology of cells because they protect their contents, concentrate chemicals to promote reactions and isolate successful genes from unsuccessful ones. "It's clear you really need both these elements to get evolution off the ground and running," says Szostak.

Research has already shown that some of building blocks for RNA-like molecules and membranes are spontaneously created by chemical reactions in outer space and in conditions that may have existed on the primordial Earth. But how these subunits were then assembled is still debated.

For RNA, one popular theory revolves around the unusual properties of montmorillonite clay. The negatively charged layers of its crystals create a sandwich of positive charge between them. This turns out to be a highly attractive environment for RNA subunits to concentrate and join together into long chains.

100-fold acceleration

Szostak wondered whether montmorillonite could also help the assembly of vesicles from simple fatty acid precursors. He remembers the day his colleagues Hanczyc and Fujikawa ran into his office to show him their first results: the clay caused a 100-fold acceleration of vesicle formation.

"It was pretty amazing," he says. Once formed, the vesicles often incorporated bit of clay and were able to grow by absorbing more fatty acid subunits.

His team also showed the clay could hold RNA and form vesicles at the same time. Fluorescently-labelled RNA attached to the clay ended up assembled into vesicles after the reaction. And the researchers were able to get these "protocells" to divide by forcing them through small holes. This caused them to split into smaller vesicles, with minimal loss of their contents.

Szostak admits that in a natural setting the vesicles would rarely be forced to divide in this way. So now his group is searching for different mixtures of membrane-forming molecules that might divide spontaneously when they reach a certain size.
Journal reference: Science (vol 302, p 618 )

Creation of Humans from Clay - WikiIslam
 
Evolution is mentioned in Quran and has been described by many Muslim scientists.

Evolution in Quran:

Pharmacy cialis » Approved Canadian Healthcare.

It's very long but clears a lot of things. There is nothing in Quran that says anything against evolution. But the mechanism of Natural Selection is still a debatable issue and it's not given in Quran.

Muhammadan Theory of Evolution:

In the zoology field of biology, Muslim biologists developed theories on evolution which were widely taught in medieval Islamic schools. John William Draper, a contemporary of Charles Darwin, considered the "Mohammedan theory of evolution" to be developed "much farther than we are disposed to do, extending them even to inorganic or mineral things." According to al-Khazini, ideas on evolution were widespread among "common people" in the Islamic world by the 12th century.[188]

The first Muslim biologist to develop a theory on evolution was al-Jahiz (781-869). He wrote on the effects of the environment on the likelihood of an animal to survive, and he first described the struggle for existence.[189][190] Al-Jahiz was also the first to discuss food chains,[191] and was also an early adherent of environmental determinism, arguing that the environment can determine the physical characteristics of the inhabitants of a certain community and that the origins of different human skin colors is the result of the environment.

You are talking about adaptation to the environment -environmental determinism- which many people confuse with the evolution theory.
The environmental determinism is the most potent theory which no one can contest and is easily proven with the skin colours and the skeleton features.

The "evolution theory" has been discredited by scientific research recently, consisting of proofs from fossil studies.

How Fossils Overturned Evolution:

For evolutionists, fossil specimens, often hundreds of millions of years old, are all tools they can use in line with their own theories. Evolutionists take a fossil, link it arbitrarily to some present-day species, and then claim that the fossil is the ancestor of the living organism in question. Upon this premise, they then construct dramatic and detailed scenarios. If the fossil in question is a fish, for example, they claim on the basis of a few bones that it possesses primitive features, newly developing organs and limbs in the process of undergoing a transition to a "higher" life form. They write books about the creature, hold conferences, and exhibit it as the intermediate form or "missing link" they have been seeking for so long.

That is, until they find themselves looking at a living specimen of this supposedly extinct creature!

When a living thing emerges in the same form it was known to have existed in millions of years ago, it of course demolishes all the evolutionist fables told about it. Its simple presence demonstrates that a living organism that—according to Darwinists' claims—should have undergone considerable evolution after the course of millions of years, somehow remained immune to the process. Moreover, it proves that at a time when, again according to evolution, only primitive forms of life were in existence, fully developed life forms with complex features and their own unique structures were already thriving. The creature that evolutionists imagine to be "primitive" is in fact nothing of the sort. In other words, the deceptive nature of invalid claims regarding "transition from a single-celled organism," "an intermediate form" and "a primitive life-form" is soon realized. Eventually, important evidence proves that the "process of gradual evolution" is nothing but a myth.

How Fossils Overturned Evolution
 
The "evolution theory" has been discredited by scientific research recently, consisting of proofs from fossil studies.

How Fossils Overturned Evolution:

For evolutionists, fossil specimens, often hundreds of millions of years old, are all tools they can use in line with their own theories. Evolutionists take a fossil, link it arbitrarily to some present-day species, and then claim that the fossil is the ancestor of the living organism in question. Upon this premise, they then construct dramatic and detailed scenarios. If the fossil in question is a fish, for example, they claim on the basis of a few bones that it possesses primitive features, newly developing organs and limbs in the process of undergoing a transition to a "higher" life form. They write books about the creature, hold conferences, and exhibit it as the intermediate form or "missing link" they have been seeking for so long.

That is, until they find themselves looking at a living specimen of this supposedly extinct creature!

When a living thing emerges in the same form it was known to have existed in millions of years ago, it of course demolishes all the evolutionist fables told about it. Its simple presence demonstrates that a living organism that—according to Darwinists' claims—should have undergone considerable evolution after the course of millions of years, somehow remained immune to the process. Moreover, it proves that at a time when, again according to evolution, only primitive forms of life were in existence, fully developed life forms with complex features and their own unique structures were already thriving. The creature that evolutionists imagine to be "primitive" is in fact nothing of the sort. In other words, the deceptive nature of invalid claims regarding "transition from a single-celled organism," "an intermediate form" and "a primitive life-form" is soon realized. Eventually, important evidence proves that the "process of gradual evolution" is nothing but a myth.

Where is the "science" behind all these claims? Care to ask Harun Yahya to provide a reference to the "scientific research" that supposedly discredited evolution?
 
Where is the "science" behind all these claims? Care to ask Harun Yahya to provide a reference to the "scientific research" that supposedly discredited evolution?


Why 50 Scientists Reject Evolution

We would like to recommend the book In Six Days (why 50 scientists choose to believe in creation) edited by John F. Ashton. It is a collection of fifty essays, each written by a different scientist. Each author’s (impressive) academic credentials are listed at the beginning of his or her essay. They span a wide variety of academic disciplines. They aren’t all engineers! (But some are.)

The 50 essays are, on average, seven pages long. Each one gives the author’s reason for believing in the Biblical creation story rather than the theory of evolution. We have to give this book a (Cr+) rating for “strong Christian content”, but nearly every essay has strong scientific arguments for creation and/or against evolution.

We should have compiled a matrix-with 50 rows (one for each scientist) and one column for each scientific argument used-to tabulate which arguments were used by which scientists. This would have shown which arguments are most convincing to most scientists.

Although we failed to count the number of times every argument was used, we did notice that the second law of thermodynamics was mentioned by seven of the fifty scientists. Specifically, they were Jeremy Walter and Stanley Mumma (two engineers), Larry Vardiman and Don deYoung (two physicists), Ker Thompson and John Baumgardner (two geophysicists, but Baumgardner also has B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering as well as his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Geophysics and Space Physics), and Geoff Downes (forestry research, but he learned about thermodynamics in a physical chemistry class).

We, too, believe the second law of thermodynamics is one of the most powerful arguments against evolution. We have not used it on our web site because we haven’t found a way to explain it in a way that the general public can understand. These seven men give it a valiant try, and nearly succeed.

The problem is that thermodynamics is a one-semester mechanical engineering course that mechanical and electrical engineering students are generally required to take to graduate. Physics majors probably have to take it, too. It is a course that students usually try to put off until their junior or senior years because it is a tough course, which many students flunk.

To explain why the second law of thermodynamics prohibits evolution, one must rely on concepts appreciated only by people who have received a passing grade in thermodynamics. People who don’t understand thermodynamics make stupid counter-arguments about snowflakes or open systems.

Perhaps someday we will try to explain why the theory of evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. Meanwhile, the best we can do is recommend you read the essays in In Six Days written by the seven scientists mentioned above.

Some Real Scientists Reject Evolution


The first big problem with evolution is that the fossil record increasingly does not, honestly viewed, support it, a fact that famous Prof. Steven Jay Gould of Harvard has described as "the trade secret of paleontology." Evolutionary theory claims that there once existed a whole series of successive forms of the various organisms alive today. These supposedly changed by infinitesimal amounts with each generation as they evolved into the present varieties, so the fossil record should show these gradual changes. But it doesn�t. Instead, it shows the sudden emergence of new species out of nowhere, fully complete with all their characteristics and not changing over time. It is almost entirely devoid of forms that can plausibly be identified as intermediates between older and newer ones. This is popularly known as the "missing link" problem, and it is massively systematic across different species and time periods. Worse, this problem is getting worse, not better, as more fossils are discovered, as the new fossils just resemble those already found and don�t fill in the gaps. In Darwin's day, it was easy to claim that the fossils were there but had not been discovered. Problem is, we now have hundreds of thousands of well-catalogued fossils, from all continents and geologic eras, and we still haven't found these intermediate forms. As Denton puts it,
"Despite the tremendous increase in geological activity in every corner of the globe and despite the discovery of many strange and hitherto unknown forms, the infinitude of connecting links has still not been discovered and the fossil record is about as discontinuous as it was when Darwin was writing the Origin."

The quantity, quality, and range of the recovered fossils is impeccable. But the more we dig, the more we keep finding the same forms over and over again, never the intermediates. Various ad hoc explanations for the gaps in the fossil record, like a temporary dearth in the environment of the chemicals needed for organisms to produce the hard body parts that fossilize well, do not stand scrutiny.

Another development that has undermined evolution is the spread of computers into evolutionary biology. Basically, computers have shown that the neat evolutionary trees that get drawn up are in fact based on imaginary relations of similarity and difference that owe more to the human mind�s tendency to perceive patterns than to the raw biological data. Computers have shown that when the characteristics of different living things are encoded in numerical form and the computer is asked to sort them into sequences based on their similarities and differences, the computer can find any number of ways of doing so that have just as much support in the data as those drawn up by humans to fit an evolutionary tree. The data say "no evolution" just as loudly as they say "evolution"; it�s just the pattern-craving human mind that gives prominence to the former way of viewing it. This is known as phenetic analysis. When the computer is constrained to push the data into an evolutionary tree, (this is called cladistic analysis) it tends to generate trees with all species as individual twigs and no species forming the crucial lower branches of the tree that evolution demands. As a result of this, many biologists have in practice stopped using the idea of ancestors and descendants when classifying new species. When the British Museum of Natural History did this a few years ago, they started a small war in scientific circles.

Evolution also suffers from the problem that many putative sequences which look logical based on the progression of one set of anatomical characteristics suddenly look illogical when attention is switched to another set. For example, the lungfish superficially seems to make a good intermediate between fish and amphibian, until one examines the rest of its internal organs, which are not intermediate in character, nor are the ways in which its eggs develop. And if different species have common ancestors, it would be reasonable to expect that similar structures in the different species be specified in similar ways in their DNA and develop in similar ways in their embryos; this is frequently not so. So evolutionary relationships depend upon an arbitrary choice of which characteristics of the organisms in question are considered most important, and different relationships can be "proved" at will.

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/locke.html


The Scientific Case Against Evolution
by Henry M. Morris, Ph.D.

Belief in evolution is a remarkable phenomenon. It is a belief passionately defended by the scientific establishment, despite the lack of any observable scientific evidence for macroevolution (that is, evolution from one distinct kind of organism into another). This odd situation is briefly documented here by citing recent statements from leading evolutionists admitting their lack of proof. These statements inadvertently show that evolution on any significant scale does not occur at present, and never happened in the past, and could never happen at all.

http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolutio

So to go back to our main subject, the analysis of the theory of Evolution and its flaws and the conclusions referenced to the Koran are proven today by Science to be true.
 
The proof is Abraham, if you read the Koran you will understand it.



Who told you "so far behind"?
You seem to have forgotten Colonialism!

From clay precisely and a drop of a warm liquid.

Koran says:
Then inquire of them: Is it they who are stronger in structure or other things We have created? We created them from sticky clay. (Qur'an, 37:11)

When the human body is examined today, it may be discovered that many elements present on the earth are also to be found in the body. Living tissues contain 95% carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus and sulphur, with a total of 26 different elements. In another verse of the Qur'an we are told:

We created man from an extract of clay. (Qur'an, 23:12)

The Arabic word "sulala," translated as "extract" in the verse, means "representative example, essence." As we have seen, the information revealed in the Qur'an 1,400 years ago confirms what modern science tells us-the fact that the same elements are employed in human creation as those found in the soil.


The Scientific Hypothesis

Two of the crucial components for the origin of life - genetic material and cell membranes - could have been introduced to one another by a lump of clay, new experiments have shown.

The study of montmorillonite clay, by Martin Hanczyc, Shelly Fujikawa and Jack Szostak at the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, revealed it can sharply accelerate the formation of membranous fluid-filled sacs.

These vesicles also grow and undergo a simple form of division, giving them the properties of primitive cells. Previous work has shown that the same simple mineral can help assemble the genetic material RNA from simpler chemicals. "Interestingly, the clay also gets internalised in the vesicles," says Leslie Orgel, an origin of life expert at the Salk Institute for Biological Sciences in San Diego, California. "So this work is quite nice in that it finds a connection between the mechanism that creates RNA and encloses it in a membrane."

Inherit, mutate, evolve

The genesis of genetic material and the emergence of cell structure are hot areas of research, but until now the two had not connected. The birth of genetic material was clearly crucial for life to take on its unique abilities to inherit, mutate and evolve.

And membranes were key to the physiology of cells because they protect their contents, concentrate chemicals to promote reactions and isolate successful genes from unsuccessful ones. "It's clear you really need both these elements to get evolution off the ground and running," says Szostak.

Research has already shown that some of building blocks for RNA-like molecules and membranes are spontaneously created by chemical reactions in outer space and in conditions that may have existed on the primordial Earth. But how these subunits were then assembled is still debated.

For RNA, one popular theory revolves around the unusual properties of montmorillonite clay. The negatively charged layers of its crystals create a sandwich of positive charge between them. This turns out to be a highly attractive environment for RNA subunits to concentrate and join together into long chains.

100-fold acceleration

Szostak wondered whether montmorillonite could also help the assembly of vesicles from simple fatty acid precursors. He remembers the day his colleagues Hanczyc and Fujikawa ran into his office to show him their first results: the clay caused a 100-fold acceleration of vesicle formation.

"It was pretty amazing," he says. Once formed, the vesicles often incorporated bit of clay and were able to grow by absorbing more fatty acid subunits.

His team also showed the clay could hold RNA and form vesicles at the same time. Fluorescently-labelled RNA attached to the clay ended up assembled into vesicles after the reaction. And the researchers were able to get these "protocells" to divide by forcing them through small holes. This caused them to split into smaller vesicles, with minimal loss of their contents.

Szostak admits that in a natural setting the vesicles would rarely be forced to divide in this way. So now his group is searching for different mixtures of membrane-forming molecules that might divide spontaneously when they reach a certain size.
Journal reference: Science (vol 302, p 618 )

Creation of Humans from Clay - WikiIslam

HIndu shastra claim the same.
 
'The SC' is showing us why R&D is neglected in muslim countries. Muslim countries don't need R&D anymore. They got it all in Quran.


Who told you neglected!?

In the zoology field of biology, Muslim biologists developed theories on evolution which were widely taught in medieval Islamic schools. John William Draper, a contemporary of Charles Darwin, considered the "Mohammedan theory of evolution" to be developed "much farther than we are disposed to do, extending them even to inorganic or mineral things." According to al-Khazini, ideas on evolution were widespread among "common people" in the Islamic world by the 12th century.[188]

The first Muslim biologist to develop a theory on evolution was al-Jahiz (781-869). He wrote on the effects of the environment on the likelihood of an animal to survive, and he first described the struggle for existence.[189][190] Al-Jahiz was also the first to discuss food chains,[191] and was also an early adherent of environmental determinism, arguing that the environment can determine the physical characteristics of the inhabitants of a certain community and that the origins of different human skin colors is the result of the environment.


You seem to be a mentally challenged person, and this is not the right place for you, there are specialised institutions for people suffering your condition.
 

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom