Customer Reviews


15 Reviews
5 star:
 (9)
4 star:    (0)
3 star:    (0)
2 star:    (0)
1 star:
 (6)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favourable review
The most helpful critical review


5.0 out of 5 stars In GOO They Trust?
Take note please - these are the views of an unregenerate Gentile.

Jonathan's 'Refuting Evolution' is a concise, informative, systematic denounciation of the 'General Theory of Evolution' (GTE).
Gerald A Kerkut (in his book 'Implications of Evolution'; and according to Chapter 9 Note 14 of Jonathan's book), defined the GTE as follows: "There is the theory...
Published 13 months ago by Mark Phillips

versus
2 of 3 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars I wouldn't waste your precious time.
If you want to believe this rubbish, you probably will, I'd you look at it objectively you'll see this for the rubbish that it is.

This book is one of the worst I have ever wasted my time reading. It is a less of a critical view on evolution, and more a critique of a book used to teach it in the USA. As he states in the book schools books are often more about...
Published 17 months ago by PhilD


‹ Previous | 1 2 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

5.0 out of 5 stars In GOO They Trust?, 24 Jun 2013
This review is from: Refuting Evolution: A Handbook for Students, Parents, and Teachers Countering the Latest Arguments for Evolution (Paperback)
Take note please - these are the views of an unregenerate Gentile.

Jonathan's 'Refuting Evolution' is a concise, informative, systematic denounciation of the 'General Theory of Evolution' (GTE).
Gerald A Kerkut (in his book 'Implications of Evolution'; and according to Chapter 9 Note 14 of Jonathan's book), defined the GTE as follows: "There is the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form. This theory can be called the 'General Theory of Evolution' ..." Kerkut continued the sentence as follows: "... and the evidence which supports this is not sufficiently strong to allow us to consider it as anything more than a working hypothesis."

As the years go by and new discoveries are made, the impartial microscope increasingly reveals the 'working hypothesis' to be false; meanwhile, the GTE has been elevated from a mere 'working hypothesis' to the point where today it is a major Western faith in all but name. And alas, the longer a person believes in any false concept, and the more of themselves they invest in propogating it, the more self-interest (including pride and fear) prevents them from changing their mind. Consequently (and coming back to the GTE), a deaf ear is persistently turned to the cold, hard evidence presented by the microscope (and the geological record).

Thus, according to Kerkut's definition of the GTE, GTE-advocates believe in 'Abiogenesis' (the idea than non-living matter somehow came to life); and furthermore, that a single living cell progressively evolved (over 'billions of years) by way of a chain of (by chance) gradual genetic-information-ADDING mutations (GIAMs), resulting in more and more complex organisms. At some point along the chain, GTE-advocates believe fish came into being, and eventually fish advanced into philosphers (i.e. mankind). Problem is, and as Jonathan relates in this book, mutations actually lead to a DECREASE in genetic information, NOT an increase ; therefore, the GTE is actually a genetic-information-defying (and microscope-denying) faith system.

In 'Refuting Evolution', Jonathan addresses and denounces the pivotal claims made by GTE-advocates; on both the 'billions of years' TIME front, and the 'fish-to-philosophers' EVOLUTION/MUTATION front. Furthermore, the book is littered with key quotes from GTE-advocates. Indeed, in Chapter 1, we are furnished with a number of quotes from evolutionists, which (unintentionally on their part) give credence to the saying 'I've already made up my mind; don't confuse me with the [biological and geological] facts.' After eight chapters spent in systematic refutation of various pivotal ideas/miconceptions held by GTE-advocates, Jonathan then crowns the book in Chapter 9; a chapter about the overwhelming evidence for DESIGN (vs chance mutation), and the insurmountable biological obstacles to the GTE.

Chapter 9 is littered with key quotes; like this one:

'Many people don't realize that even the most simple cell is fantastically complex ... The chemical hurdles that non-living matter must overcome to form life are insurmountable ...'

(Here is a key quote of Dr Lee Spetner included by Jonathan - from Spetner's book 'Not By Chance': "... I've never found a mutation that added information ... All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not to increase it.")

'The genetic information in the DNA cannot be translated except by many different enzymes,which are themselves encoded. So the code cannot be translated except via products of translation, a vicious circle that ties evolutionary origin-of-life theories in knots ... The genetic code also has vital editing machinery that is itself encoded in the DNA. This shows that the system was fully functioning from the beginning - another vicious circle for evolutionists.'

*********

The Two insurmountable problems (i.e. the elephant in the room) for GTE-advocates:

As aforementioned, insurmountable problem number one (for advocates of Abiogenesis) is that non-living matter is non-living matter is non-living matter. (If a spade is still a spade, to believe non-living matter could somehow come to life, basically requires following Alice down the raddit hole to Wonderland; a place offering a refuge from the gadfly known as the microscope.) And insurmountable problem number two, for advocates of Abiogenesis, is that the second bedrock basis of their faith (i.e. genetic-information-ADDING Mutations into new and distinct KINDS; from fish-to-philosophers) does not correlate with the hard, cold evidence: mutations lead to a DECREASE, not an increase in genetic information. In a nutshell (and given even trillions of years), a fish cannot progressively mutate into a land animal, and a land animal cannot progressively mutate into a bird; let alone into mankind. According to the impartial microscope (let alone Holy Scripture), the idea of PROGRESSIVE GIAMs is FICTION; not fact.

As Jonathan says in Chapter 9, 'Even if we grant evolutionists the first cell, the problem of increasing the total information content remains. To go from the first cell to a human means finding a way to generate enormous amounts of information ... This includes the recipe to build eyes, nerves, skin, bones ...'

As the impartial microscope shows, "Mother Mutation's" genetic cupboard is akin to "Old Mother Hubbard's:" it is BARE! (I.e. there is NO NEW/EXTRA GENETIC INFORMATION.) Furthermore, just as "Old Mother Hubbard" was unable to give her poor dog a bone, "Even Older Mother Mutation" is unable to give her poor fish a pair of fleshed-out arms and legs.

And when it comes to rock formations and fossilized remains, Jonathan informs us that the 'billions of years' idea (during which these gene-information-ADDING mutations are supposed to have occured) does not correlate with the geological and fossil evidence either. Indeed, Chapter 3 contains a number of candid quotes from GTE-advocates, in which they admit they have failed to find transitional fossils (fossils needed to support their fishes-to-philosophers concept). Given fish will never progressively mutate into philosophers, the absence of transitional fossils is no surprise. And in Chapter 5, Jonathan says this: 'Many of the alleged transitional forms (i.e. fossils) are based on fragmentary remains ... Evolutionary bias means that such remains are likely to be interpreted as transitional ... But when more bones are discovered ... [they] are no longer plausible as transitional. It is also notable that the alleged intermediate forms are often trumpted in the media, while retractions are usually muted or unpublicized.' (In other words, claims that transitional fossils have been found are trumpeted from the media rooftops; while retractions are swept under the media rug.)

At any evolution conference from Seattle to Sydney,there will always be an enormous biological and genetic elephant in the room; for non-living matter does not somehow come to life; and fishes do not progressively mutate into anything - they always were,and always will be, plain old fish.

**********

But as already said, because GTE's idea of PROGRESSIVE gene-ADDING Mutations (over 'billions of years) is a faith system in all but name (a system that SUBJECTS the cold evidence to pre - and mis - conceptions), dogged advocates of evolution may simply refuse to listen to the impartial biological and geological evidence. Atheistic advocates of evolution seem to think they are arguing with Holy Scripture and theists alone; the irony (which they are in absolute denial of) is that they are also arguing with the biological and geological evidence. The microscope does not read the Bible ; it just shows the facts; and we have the God-given freedom to view those facts objectively, or subjectively.

Disciples of Messiah Jesus will find 'Refuting Evolution' to be an excellent educational resource with which to furnish themselves and their families with information (on the geological/TIME and biological/MUTATION front); information that vaccinates them against what is taught in schools (and the media); information that equips them with iron-clad biological and geological facts, should they ever find themselves cornered by someone who thinks that over 'billions of years' non-living matter eventually became fish, and that fish eventually mutated into philosophers. The sooner Jonathan gets 'Refuting Evolution' into Kindle form, the better.

**********

On the need for Second Covenant consistency and integrity (from the first sentence of Genesis to the final sentence of Revelation; not merely from Genesis 1-11 !!!):

GTE-advocates do not have a monopoly on self-interest and dogged subjectivity; alas,even sincere disciples of Messiah Jesus can behave in the very same way. Interjecting my own bracketed comments, note these words of Jonathan (from Chapter 1): "It is a fallacy to believe that facts [or even alas,sentences of Holy Scripture !] speak for themselves - they are always interpreted according to a [preconceived] framework [yes indeed; even frameworks such as these: 'TULIP Theology'; 'Replacement Theology'; 'PRE-Trib Theology']."

The entire evolutionary superstructure is built opon the false, biology-defying GTE; alas, and likewise, the entire 'TULIP Theology' camp is built upon the false, Bible-defying, Augustinian misconception of election and predestination. Everything discovered through the microscope is subjected by GTE-advocates to the GTE; everything read in Holy Scripture is subjected by TULIP-advocates to the TULIP. What a mess!

Many 'Evangelicals' are in denial of their true position: they have not achieved 'Prima Scriptura'; let alone 'Sola.' Many (perhaps the vast majority of) Evangelicals are actually guilty of 'Secunda Scriptura.' In other words, on one or more aspects of the narrow Way, they SUBJECT Holy Scripture to pre(and mis)conceptions.

Would it be acceptable for 'Tom Young-Earther' to denounce 'Dick and Harriet Old-Earther' for SUBJECTIVELY reading 'billions of years' into the opening section of Genesis, if 'Tom Young-Earther' himself doggedly and SUBJECTIVELY reads 'Cessationism'; or 'TULIP Theology'; or 'Replacement Theology'; or 'PRE-Trib Theology'; or 'Clerical PASTORHOOD,' into other parts of Holy Scripture? Would Tom not be calling the kettle black? (Or in Messiah's analogy, would Tom not be denouncing the speck of EISEGESIS in Dick 'n' Harriet's eyes, while having a log of eisegesis in his own?) Or is it OK to start messing around with certain passages, once we get past Genesis 11?!

With that 'Secunda Scriptura' tragedy in mind, do not simply make sure your thinking is correct on the matter of Creation (via Jonathan's highly informative book 'Refuting Evolution'); make sure that all areas of the narrow Way are OBJECTIVELY understood. Do build yourself a stellar narrow Way LIBRARY; do get the following books:

IS JOHN 3:16 THE GOSPEL?; The Normal Christian Birth; Jesus Baptises in one Holy Spirit - three books by David Pawson,on industrial-strength and truly trinitarian evangelism.

When Jesus Returns - by David Pawson; on Messiah's return.

Our Hands Are Stained with Blood: The Tragic Story of the Church and the Jewish People - by Michael L Brown; on the consequences (and doctrinal falsity) of 'Replacement/Fulfillment Theology.'

Go and Sin No More: A Call to Holiness - by Michael L Brown; on authentic lifestyle purity.

The Biblical Church Jesus told disciples to take up their cross; it was Constantine who told folks to take up their trowel.

God's Strategy in Human History: God's Sovereignty and Man's Responsibility - by Roger Forster and Paul Marston; on scriptural (instead of Augustinian) election and predestination.

The Reformers and Their Stepchildren - by Leonard Verduin; a non-TULIP-tinted account of the horrendous 'Magisterial Reformation.'

**********

For GTE-advocates (i.e. advocates of Abiogenesis/PROGRESSIVE Mutation), the number one book to get along with 'Refuting Evolution' (outside of Holy Scripture itself) is WHY DOES GOD ALLOW NATURAL DISASTERS? by David Pawson.

Take note please - these are the views of an unregenerate Gentile.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent!, 29 May 2013
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Refuting Evolution: A Handbook for Students, Parents, and Teachers Countering the Latest Arguments for Evolution (Paperback)
Great introductory book on lies of people who are trying to impose the hoax of evolution. Read the second part after that too. It was (or maybe still is) free on website Creation.com.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2 of 3 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars I wouldn't waste your precious time., 23 Feb 2013
This review is from: Refuting Evolution: A Handbook for Students, Parents, and Teachers Countering the Latest Arguments for Evolution (Paperback)
If you want to believe this rubbish, you probably will, I'd you look at it objectively you'll see this for the rubbish that it is.

This book is one of the worst I have ever wasted my time reading. It is a less of a critical view on evolution, and more a critique of a book used to teach it in the USA. As he states in the book schools books are often more about economy than being cutting edge. To be honest I've not read the US education book, and the integrity of one book is not a viable arguement against evolution.

Some of the statements are just ridiculous. For example, he states Galileo and Newton were creationists (no &@& Sherlock, they died long before evolution, so what exactly does this show?).

The book talks a lot about a suppossed assumption in evolutions that creationism is wrong. This is not an assumption, but an outcome of the theory.

It talks about science creating a theory to fit the facts and testing it and refining it depending on the outcome of tests and new information as though this is some how dishonest.

It lists the facts that scientists have made errors and corrected theories in the passed, and that they don't always agree with each other as evidence of creationism. This is merely evidence that people aren't perfect, and could be twisted to arguments against evolution, but certainly not an argument for creationism.

He devotes a chapter to missing intermediate species. From his numbers in the book there are an estimated 1 in 5 families of animals that have no fossil record (an example of a family of animals being cat or dog, which he conveniently doesn't explain. If this many families are missing, there are many more species missing, and it is expected that intermediates make a minute percentage of these. In essence the odds of finding a fossilised intermediate are in the region of 1 to hundreds of millions, or even billions.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


26 of 42 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars T. rex ate grass - really?, 18 Dec 2007
This review is from: Refuting Evolution: A Handbook for Students, Parents, and Teachers Countering the Latest Arguments for Evolution (Paperback)
I think it's worth pointing out that Ken Ham is someone who personally believes that T. rex coexisted with humans and was designed by God to eat grass. Yes, that's definitely the reason why it had all those sharp pointy teeth up to 30cm long. Likewise lions, tigers, wolves etc. - all of these were designed by God to eat grass. Couldn't have been meat, because meat requires death and there wasn't any before Adam was foolish enough to eat God's forbidden apples. Is there any actual evidence for this point of view? - Doesn't matter, because if the Bible says so it must be true!

The authors of this book have no genuine interest in evolution, true or otherwise, otherwise than pushing their agenda of Biblical creation (literal, in 6 days). Simply put, their logic is:
1. I/we know everything in the Bible is true.
2. Evolution goes against what it says in the Bible.
3. Therefore, evolution is wrong. In fact, evolution is just a hoax/conspiracy by liberal atheists to do away with Christianity.

So, if you also believe that everything the Bible says is true and have no interest in considering other possibilities then you'll probably enjoy this book, but if you have an open mind and would actually like to understand something about evolution then buy something else i.e. a book written by people who actually know something about the subject.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


0 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Good introduction to a flawed worldview, 15 April 2012
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Refuting Evolution: A Handbook for Students, Parents, and Teachers Countering the Latest Arguments for Evolution (Paperback)
I'm not a young earth creationist, and I consider Jonathan Sarfati's "presuppositionalist" faction of the creationist movement to be one of the more extreme. However, I admit that "Refuting Evolution" is a relatively good introduction to the young earth creationist worldview.

The book was first published in 1999, when Sarfati was a leading member of an organization known as Answers in Genesis (AiG). After a split in 2006, Sarfati formed a new group, known as Creation Ministries International (CMI). More recent editions of "Refuting Evolution" therefore lack the foreword by Ken Ham, who still belongs to Answers in Genesis. The theological differences between the two groups seem to be minor, however. Both are evangelical and based on presuppositional apologetics, something associated with certain strands of the Calvinist tradition. Presuppositionalism means that, strictly speaking, the Biblical worldview is presupposed rather than "proven" evidentially. Of course, presuppositionalists believe that all worldviews are biased in this way, including Darwinism. To quote Sarfati: "It's not really a question of who is biased, but which bias is the correct bias with which to be biased!" Since the author cannot explain how the correct bias should be chosen, his position - if consistently applied - is really a form of hopeless dogmatism.

"Refuting Evolution" is a written in the form of an extensive response to a book published by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, "Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science". Most of the standard young earth creationist arguments are featured: micro-evolution doesn't entail macro-evolution, all mutations are harmful, there are no transitional forms (Archaeopteryx is debunked), radioactive dating methods are unreliable, the big bang never happened, etc. The first chapter presents the presuppositional apologetics of AiG/CMI, while the last one argues that intelligent design should be considered a valid scientific explanation.

Despite Sarfati's strong Biblicism, the book doesn't contain any specific chapters on Bible interpretation or Jesus Christ. Even rather extreme points, such as the literal interpretation of Noah's Ark, are mentioned in a very calm, laid back and almost "rational" manner. This suggests that "Refuting Evolution" is geared towards the general reader. Apparently, Sarfati has been quite successful on this score - "Refuting Evolution" might be the most bestselling creationist book ever written. Evolutionists of most stripes, for rather obvious reasons, don't like it!

Those interested in young earth creationism should definitely read "Refuting Evolution" by Jonathan Sarfati, together with "Scientific creationism" by Henry Morris and "The fossils say no" by Duane Gish. These three books could be considered the classics of the YEC movement. It probably never gets any better (relatively speaking!) than this, and frequently gets even worse. Of course, reading the chapters on the creation and the Flood in the Biblical Book of Genesis, pretending it's all a quite literal story, might also tell you what we're up against here...

Since Dr. Jonathan Sarfati's book is a good introduction to a flawed worldview, I graciously give it five stars.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


12 of 22 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars It's a shame, 25 Jun 2009
By 
Badger (London, England) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Refuting Evolution: A Handbook for Students, Parents, and Teachers Countering the Latest Arguments for Evolution (Paperback)
It's a shame the authors of this book didn't attempt to learn anything about modern biology, which shows the living world to be a subject of greater awe and grandeur than their tired and often muddled impoverished account of it is. It's sad that this level of discussion passes for a scientific debate and is even taken seriously by some people.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


5 of 10 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Science used to counter evolution, 2 May 2010
By 
This review is from: Refuting Evolution: A Handbook for Students, Parents, and Teachers Countering the Latest Arguments for Evolution (Paperback)
There are a number of people rating this as 1 star and making disparaging remarks about the author.

The author is Dr Jonathan Sarfati.

B.Sc. (Hons.) in Chemistry (with condensed matter and nuclear physics papers substituted)
Ph.D. in Spectroscopy (Physical Chemistry)

I seriously doubt the other reviewers have anywhere near the scientific knowledge or intelligence that the author has. Their down ranking is purely based on atheistic/evolutionary dogma.

This book presents each of the main arguments for evolution, and refutes each using logic and scientific reasoning.

If you are open minded and wanting to come to an informed decision based on evidence and arguments from both sides. This is a must read book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 3 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent Book, 30 Jun 2010
By 
Dave Kinsella "Jesus First" (Ireland) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Refuting Evolution: A Handbook for Students, Parents, and Teachers Countering the Latest Arguments for Evolution (Paperback)
It explained clearly and effectively how the Creation model best fits the evidence we see around us, and went through various types of evidence that there are. It is non-technical which is perfect for a layman like me. I do not pretend to be a science person. The subject of Creation/Evolution does not grab me like Church history does, but to have a good understanding of the issues at hand is, I believe, necessary for any thinking Christian today. If you are thinking about the fact that you need to better understand your faith and why you believe the Bible, especially the book of Genesis; or if you have been challenged on this issue and find you have no answers then I highly recommend this book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


44 of 82 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Superb, concise, well-researched science, 25 Sep 2001
By A Customer
This review is from: Refuting Evolution: A Handbook for Students, Parents, and Teachers Countering the Latest Arguments for Evolution (Paperback)
This book is aimed at students and teachers, and was written as a refutation of The National Academy of Sciences' recently published educator's guidebook entitled "Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science."
The old debate between evolution and design continues to this day, and the strength of the argument against evolution is increasing. Dr. Sarfati demonstrates how creationism is both rational, arguable and scientific. He also brings to light the general (or wilful) ignorance among pro-evolutionists of the modern design argument.
In this book, Sarfati covers a wide range of topics, including:
1. Variation and Natural Selection, demonstrating that organisms can "change" over time without "evolving" (in the sense of information increase.) He clearly establishes the difference (which remains obscured in most pro-evolution literature) between changes which arise through the re-shuffling and loss of genetic information, and the evolutionists unproven claim that information can spontaneously increase - the myth which drives the modern amoeba-to-man evolution ideology.
2. Missing Links - Sarfati awakens the reader to the sheer lack of evidence for evolution in the fossil record, and explodes the various arguments which propose certain fossils as transitional forms.
3. Bird Evolution - Considers examples put forward such as Archaeopteryx, feathered dinosaurs and the impossibility of dinosaur-to-bird evolution, reptile-to-bird evolution etc.
4. Whale Evolution
5. Human Evolution
6. Astronomy - namely the Big Bang
7. The Age of the Earth - Sarfati points out how at least 90% of dating methods give nowhere near the millions of years evolution demands, and how the radiometric dating methods which do give these figures are both inconsistent and unreliable.
And there's more besides. Dr. Sarfati has no qualms in debunking the fallacious atheistic propaganda of modern evolutionists such as Professor Dawkins (particularly in his refutation of the absurd claim by Dawkins that "feathers are modified reptilian scales"), making this an exciting and inspiring read for student and teacher. Written in 1999, this is very recent piece of work, and well worth reading.
Regardless of your position on the subject of origins, you ought to be aware of the problems with evolution, and "Refuting Evolution" by main-stream creationist Dr. Sarfati is an excellent place to start. I would encourage teachers (if they dare) to purchase copies for classrooms and school libraries.
W.Simpson
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


13 of 26 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Religion dressed up as pseudo-science, 4 Oct 2008
By 
N. Holt "Nick" (UK) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Refuting Evolution: A Handbook for Students, Parents, and Teachers Countering the Latest Arguments for Evolution (Paperback)
The first thing to note about this book is that it is not written by an expert in evolution. Dr Safarti is an extremist Christian with a PhD in theology; and he writes for the Journal of Creation. His agenda is clear - he is promoting the Christian creation myth as fact. His education in biology is non-existent. This becomes obvious throughout the the book, in which the author demonstrates an embarrassing lack of understanding of even the basics of evolutionary biology. He presents no evidence to refute any aspect of evolutionary theory, and either misunderstands the subject completely or simply manufactures dishonest statements which he can then knock down.

When I'm ill I call a doctor. If I want to learn about evolution I do not call a theologist. His agenda is clear throughout, his lack of scientific understanding is typical of a creationist, and this book is absolutely peppered with factual inaccuracies and deliberate dishonesty.

His defence of the Biblical timeline demonstrates his ignorance in other areas - namely geology, chemistry, history and physics. Facts are twisted and omitted in a desperate attempt to infer that the Bible is accurate, even though there are written records which are older than than his date for the creation of the Earth.

This really is stupidity and ignorance at its worst, and the only people who will give it any credence are those who happen to have been brought up believing the same book. This won't convince anyone willing to look openly and honestly at the evidence.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 2 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

This product

Only search this product's reviews