So the hardest question in the world which needs to be answered.

Have the living being evolved

without anything or were they created by a creator ? The question that was discussed countless
times in history and caused really serious conflict between people. I’ll try to answer it here. Let’s
see how Adam and the best scientists would be debating with each others.

Jean Babtiste de Lamarck stood up and said :

I spent my whole life studying the living beings and even though they seem different when you
look at them, they’re actually very similar, they all have the same basic qualities and only some
few qualities differs them. And I also noticed that the complex the being is, the more beautiful
and perfect it is and humans are the most perfect and beautiful of them all. I thought that
maybe there was a simple natural mechanism that cause some inferior and simple beings to
turn into superior and complex beings. Yes, there have to be a natural explanation for this to
make all these creatures similar to each others.

Then Adam questioned him

And what is this natural mechanism that you’re talking about ? Have you known it ?

Lamarck looked at him calmly and said :

Yes and they’re not 1 mechanism, but 3 actually, I’ll try to explain them to you as simply as
possible. The first one is the beings turn to one another with hybridization, when two different
animals mate with each other, a different one will be born, that’s how new animals come from
the mating of two different types of animals.

Lamarck stopped talking for a while and then said :

The second mechanism is the one that adjusts with nature. That beautiful barbaric nature which
we live in has a serious effect on beings. When nature changes, beings also are forced to change
to be able to adjust with it. Simply, when nature change, the beings also change bit by bit and
then they pass on their new genes to their offspring to also help them survive in the new
environment. And by time beings completely evolve.

Then he stopped talking again and then said :

The last mechanism is using and not using, there are organs the being uses all the time, so they
become stronger to be able to adjust to this non-stopping using of them. And then the being
pass his new organs to their offspring to help them survive. And by time beings completely
evolve.

Can you provide examples for that ? Adam questioned

Then Lamarck started talking again :

When it comes to hybridization, we have the Mule, a mixture of a horse and a donkey and we
also have the Walphin, a mixture of Dolphin and Whale. And there are others countless
examples of this in nature.

When it comes to the adjusting with nature mechanism, we have birds that can’t play like ducks
geeses, their ancestors used to fly in the past, but their decedents lived in an environment full of
food, so they no longer needed to fly anymore, and with time came a generation without the
ability to fly. Another example are the Lizards, they used to live on a hard surface, so they
crawled all the time until they limps had disappeared and the had become snakes.

When it comes to the last mechanism, the continues use of organs we have Giraffes, for
example. Their ancestors had short necks, eating only from the small trees their necks could
reach. But after a period of time, small trees started to get rarer and rarer, so their necks
continued to become longer until they’re like today.

Then two different red lights shined in two different places. A light at the biologist with the thick
white beard, Charles Darwin. And another light at the biologist and anthropologist, Alfred Russel
Wallace.

Then Darwin stood up and calmly said :

MR. Lamarck the mechanisms you talk about, which I mostly agree with, but he thought the
being is the one who evolves by himself to adjust with his environment, like the being changes
to adjust to be able to live in his new environment. But what I had discovered, is that the beings
have nothing in them to make them evolve by themselves, it happens randomly. It happens
through a mechanism I called Natural Selection.

Darwin continued talking and said :

Natural Selection means survival of the fittest and death for the weak. That’s how life works. For
example, if the decedents of Giraffes got longer necks from the continues use of it as Lamarck
said, then when those decedents that have long necks live with other decedents who have
shorter ones, they’ll have an advantage to make it more fitting for survival. And with times, the
decedents with shorter necks will go extinct and the longer necked giraffes remain alive. That’s
the motive of evolution. The nature select which is worthy of living and surviving. It’s not the
choice of beings, but the choice of nature. The ancestors of giraffes were not the ones to make
themselves evolve, they evolved naturally and been selected by nature.

Then Darwin said another thing :

There are other examples which stand to reason. Red bedbugs are preferred by the birds than
the green ones. With time, the delicious red bud bugs go extinct and the green ones keep
surviving and living. Elephants with ivory canes which humans hunt go extinct and the other
elephants keep on living. And this how nature selects which survive or not, but the beings have
no effects at all on their survival.

Then Darwin finished and said :

The shocking truth that I realized at the end, is that all the beings we see around us, all without
exceptions have evolved with Lamarck mechanisms and natural selection from single - cell
organisms to simple sea beings and then to lizards and then to birds and mammals, only with
Lamarck mechanisms and natural selection. One of these mammals evolved to two types, one
evolved to apes and the other to humans.

Have this made you not believe in God anymore ? Adam questioned Darwin

Darwin said :

God no longer interferes with life in my opinion, I no longer know where’s even God, maybe he
created the universe, maybe not.

Then Wallace started talking and he was calmer than Darin and said :

I also had my own travels to the Amazons and The Indonesian Islands and I met Darwin and we
had a mutual research, but each one of us researched alone. I was in one of these Islands and
then I had a serious fever, during that fever, the idea fell in my head, the idea of survival of the
fittest. I wrote my research and sent it to Darwin.

Then Darwin said :

I was amazed. I also reached the same result Wallace did and when we met again, Wallace
suggested that we change the name of Natural Selection to Survival Of The Fittest and I agreed
with him.
Wallace then looked at him and said :

But I disagree with Darwin when it comes to human beings. The great intelligence and abilities
the humans have, cannot have come from beings with much more inferior intelligence.
Surviving doesn’t need all that intelligence. Tenth of the current humans’ brains can make them
survive just fine. I suggested that there was a great power who designed humans and is leading
the evolution process of other beings to be this perfect. Darwin went too far with it that he
sometimes equals between some apes and some Africans which are, in his opinion, still have
lots of apes qualities. And he expected with the same logic of surviving of the fittest that the
superior white race, with time, will exterminate those inferior savage Africans.

Another red light illuminated, it was at the German biologist and August Wiesmann and then he
started talking and said :

Excuse me, gentlemen. Maybe that talk had some value in the past, but all that talk after
Mendel’s research, is believed to be just a bunch of nonsense with no solid science to back it up.

There are two different cells in this world. Germ cells and Somatic cells. Germ cells are the ones
who contain the information (DNA) of the being. And this DNA can only be passed on by the
parents to their offspring. But Somatic cells is what happens during the being’s life, and all that
is worthless and can’t be passed to the being’s offspring. That’s a rule. No matter how longer
the giraffe neck become during their lives, they won’t pass it to their offspring because it’s not in
their germ cells, but somatic cells. The strong man who builds muscles won’t pass those muscles
to his offspring, he can only pass what’s in his germ cells. And to prove this, I brought some rats
and cut their tails for many many generations, but their offspring always had a normal tail, not
even 1cm shorter. So the fairy tail of passing the acquired qualities can’t simply happen. And
that really knocks off two of the Wallace and Darwin mechanisms. The Mechanism of nature
affection on beings and the mechanism of using and not using. No matter how many times the
being uses his organs and they evolved, no matter how their necks got longer or shorter, they
won’t pass those qualities to their offspring.

Then Wiesmann said :

You also mentioned the hybridization mechanism. And you assumed that it’s responsible for the
varying of many beings. But unfortunately, this was also found to be nonsense. Yes, two
different beings can mate and have a different offspring. But that offspring is ALWAYS sterile
(rip) and he can never mate and have offspring and he dies alone (rip again). And it’s always
weaker than it’s parents. The Mule is always slower than the horse, so natural selection
wouldn’t benefit anything from it, never actually mind that he’s even sterile.

Adam said when he looked at Lamarck

So the three mechanisms that Lamarck suggested fell down. This means there are no other
mechanism for beings to evolve. There’s nothing in the first place to cause evolution. Does that
means the theory is not scientifically accurate ?
Another red light shined at a man with light beard and silky hair and deep eyes. He was one of
the first scientists who studied Genetics, his name is Hugo de Vries. And he said

We thought that Darwin’s theory had fell down, but then I discovered something very
interesting that revived the theory again. I discovered a change in germ cells, a change that gives
beings another qualities which he can pass to his offspring. A change which I called Mutations.

De Vries said :

From my experiments on the Evening primrose, I found out generations that had different
individuals than the normal. They look different and their color is different. I isolated them and
let them mate with each others. And then I found out their offspring are also different like them.
So these individuals who are different passed their different genes to their offspring. That made
me do more experiments until I discovered The Mutations, yes gentlemen, Mutations. They’re
changes which happen in the germ cell of the being not the somatic cells. Changes that can be
passed. That the answer of the true mechanism of evolution.

A red light shined at a man and then stood up Thomas Morgan and said :

From my experiments too on millions of individuals of Drosphilia melanogaster that have red
eyes, I suddenly discovered a different individuals than the rest of them, an individual with
white eyes. I isolated it and let her mate with a red-eyed one and the result was a generation of
one thousands red-eyes individuals and three white-eyed ones. I continued my experiments
until I succeeded I discovering more than 20 mutations that changed the being and his passed
those changes to his offspring.

I also discovered what we can imagine as a beads of the long string of the DNA. Every bead has a
quality of the being. I called these genetics. And I knew that the mutation can take place in one
of the being’s genetics and that gene changes, thus changing a quality of the being. And maybe
more than one mutation can take place and lots more qualities can change until a new different
being is produced. And with generations, mutations happen randomly and beings change
gradually.

Morgan kept talking in excitement and said :

The mutation that produces a weak or deformed offspring, which is unfitting for life and
survival, natural selection kills it. Like a wolf is born with blind eyes. And the small mutations
that change some of the qualities, but it doesn’t affect the survival of the being, natural
selection doesn’t kill it, like when a wolf is born in a different color. But the good mutation
which results in an offspring more fitting for survival, natural selection keeps it alive, like when a
wolf is born with more thick fur in a cold area, natural selection is not a smart operation that
happens specifically, not at all in fact. It’s blind. Works by the rule of surviving of the fittest and
death for the death for the unworthy of survival. Who is given good qualities by nature stays
and have more offspring until a new species exists. And who was given a bad hand by nature,
dies. And who with given nothing, it says the same. And that’s how the beings evolve. By
mutations and natural selection.

(KEEP ON READING BECAUSE SHIT IS GETTING SERIOUS HERE)

Now we hear clapping from all the people who listened to this, the theory almost fell but it has
risen again, strongly. Morgan felt a little proud And continued

Mutations can be simple, replacing a letter instead of another, L instead of P, or maybe a

removal of a whole gene, or copying the same gene twice, and a lot more. The more you mess
with the being’s genes, the more different it becomes.

Everyone now is strongly heading to completely believe in evolution, but we still have more
opinions here. Another red light illuminated and stood up a Russian Genetics scientist who lived
during the soviet. He’s Aleksandr Sergeevich Serebrovski and he said

Unfortunately, there’s a genetic rule we discovered later in Russian that kills this mechanism,
not exactly kill it, but limit it.

I sit on my chair and started messing with my beard and wondered, what we have this time ? I’m
starting to enjoy the fall and rise of the theory.

The Russian Said in his Russian voice :

The Gene Fund, which was called Gene Pool after it was known in Europe, and let me explain it
to you. You all know that all living beings have a certain classification. The kingdom, the class,
the order, the family, the species, the genus. Every species has a special gene pool for it alone.
That gene pool has the qualities of that certain species. Mutations can happen as much as it
likes in that pool and it can’t go beyond it. And as Morgan said, if the mutations were bad or
harmful, natural selection would end them. And if they were good, natural selection would help
them to survive. These mutations are passed to their offspring until they become completely
different. So different that they can no longer mate with other individual of the same genus,
they only mate with each others until they are so different we call them a species. And they
become a new species under the genus. And every genus in nature has hundreds other species
that came for mutations. But the genetic rule we discovered stated that the mutations have
limit they can’t go beyond. These limits are the limits of the gene pool of the genus and they can
never go beyond that pool.

Adam said, sorry I didn’t understand, can you provide examples ?

The Russian scientist said :

The Equus’s genus for example has some species that includes all the horses and donkeys in this
world. The Equus’s genus millions of years ago had no variations and it had only one horse
which is believed to be the common ancestor of them all, it’s name was Equus. That old horse
had a gene pool that included all of his qualities. And one time, good mutations happened in
that pool that resulted in another species different from the Equus, they are smaller and weaker
and are called donkeys. They could no longer mate with Equus again, they only could mate with
each others. And that’s how they became a different species called donkeys, but it’s under the
Equus’s genus.

Then Aleksander said :

Then another mutations happened to the Equus that resulted in a different species that it’s
individuals also only mate with each others, they’re called wild horses, and they’re also under
the Equus’s genus. Then the donkeys themselves had another mutations that resulted in what
we call Zebras, also under the Equus’s genus. And that’s how mutations kept happening in the
old ancestors and then result in new species. But all these species at the end will have the same
genes of the Equus. A pet horse, a donkey, a zebra, a wild horse, an Indian horse, an Arabian
horse, an African horse, etc, but they’re all still under the genus of Equus. And it’s not possible
for the mutations to result in a being that isn’t Equus, like a dog or an elephant. Which means
the Equus will never go beyond it’s genus and be something else, no matter how many
mutations it has, that’s a genetic rule. The dog’s ancestor (Canidae) will have mutations which
will result in hundreds of species like dogs, wolves, fox, etc, but they’ll all stay just Canidaes,
nothing more, it won’t become a lizard, the cat won’t be a dog, even after a billion years.

Then Morgan complained and said :

But sir, evolution never stated that the elephant became a horse or anything like that. It simply
stated that the dog’s, cat’s, horse’s, bear’s ancestors all came from the mammals’ ancestor and
that birds came from reptiles, and that the mammals’ and reptiles’ ancestors came from the
amphibians’ ancestor which came from the fish’s ancestor which him and echinoderm’s
ancestors came from another common ancestor and it keeps on like that until we reach the
universal common ancestor LUCA.

Aleksander said :

Sir, I mentioned Equus to just make an example of the gene pool and you didn’t let me keep
talking to explain more about how that law completely limit the power of evolution. Evolution
simply says that one day, there was an individual of fishes that evolved into the amphibians’
ancestor, so simply there was a normal fish and one of it’s eggs hatched before and a being
which has amphibians qualities came out of it, the common ancestor of all amphibians. Came
from a mutation that happened inside that egg. Evolution also says that one of the reptiles
evolved and became the common ancestor of all birds today, that one day another egg of a
reptile hatched and came out a being with bird’s qualities and became the ancestor of all birds.
This is against the genetics rules. The fish no matter what happens to it, it’ll stay a fish in the
end, it will never go beyond it’s gene pool and go to the gene pool of the amphibians, means it
will not suddenly grow legs or some of it’s offspring suddenly grow legs out of nowhere and use
them to run on the beach and become an amphibian. And the reptile no matter what happens
to it, will stay a reptile, it won’t grow wings out of nowhere and become a bird because the gene
never even existed in the first place to have mutations.

Every genus has it’s gene pool and that gene pool can result in even thousands of species, but
the genus will never go beyond it’s gene pool to another gene pool and have new genes out of
nowhere.

And then the Russian finished and said :

In conclusion, evolution can explain how different species come from the same genus with
mutations and natural selection, but they can’t explain how the ancestors of these species even
came to life in the first place. These ancestors never evolved from something before it because
it’s genetically impossible, something can’t come from nothing and you won’t just suddenly
wake up and find new genes because they can’t come out of nowhere, mutations only mess
with genes that already exist in you.

Then another red light illuminated and stood up the British biologist Richard Dawkins and said

This actually isn’t a problem for evolution at all, mutations are different, some can’t go beyond
the gene pool, but some can

The Russian then said :

It’s impossible, that’s a rule which can’t be changed

Richard stopped talking for a while and then the Russian said :

I’ll explain it in another way to be understood better, every being in this world has some specific
genetics, every gene describes a quality of that being, good, now evolution say that simple
beings have evolved into more complex beings, simple creatures with simple genetics that
describe it’s simple formation, they say that someday new cells appeared that evolved into eyes
that they can see with. How the cells suddenly appeared out of nowhere ? From mutations ?
Mutations don’t create things that never existed. They only mess with what already exists. They
mess with the existing info and sometimes the messing is good and sometimes it’s bad, but it
can’t create new info. Mutations won’t give a human wings because he doesn’t have the gene in
the first place and they won’t give eyes to creatures that can’t see. The mutations aren’t magic.

The feather needs new genes with new info, the wings need new genes with new info, the
simplest being that ever existed was LUCA and it had 355 genes, every human have 20
thousands genes, so in order for LUCA to evolve to a human it needs another 19.645 gene, how
did it got them from nowhere ? The people of evolution need to search for another thing to
explain how can this possibly happen, a thing that can explain how genes can be created from
nothing. And I’ll say it again, mutations can only mess with the genes that already exist, they
can’t create new genes, never.

Adam said, maybe LUCA had a huge gene pool that contained all the info in every being today
and then mutations happened like we all know ?

The Russian said :

That’s failed theory, every being has the genes that describe only his qualities, the cell won’t
have the genes that describe bear’s eyes, bird’s wings’ human’s brain, etc. The cell will only have
the genes that describe it’s qualities. The fish doesn’t have secret genes that describe bat’s
wings or kangaroo legs, the fish only has the genes for fishes. That’s why you’ll never even find
one scientist that claims this theory because it’d make the explanation of the origins of life
harder for them. They’re fighting hard now to prove that LUCA with all it’s complexity came out
of nowhere and you actually want to make her have all the beings’ genes in it’s gene pool ? And
anyways that’s an assumption without proof and we don’t accept things like that.

Another red light illuminated and a man with the name of Hermann Muller who has a Nobel
prize stood up and said

With all respect to that beautiful assumption you just made and with respect to the rule of the
gene pool which extremely limits evolution, I want to add something.

Scientists shouldn’t worry themselves trying to prove that mutations are the reason for this
beauty of life and nature around us, that’s actually nonsense, mutations are mostly errors, just
random errors. It happens during the natural processing of DNA copying, but the errors have
very low chances to actually happen, like 1 in 10 thousands chance. Because there’s a
mechanism in the genes that fix the errors that happen, there’s about 1 million error and 1
million fix in just 1 day. And despite that mechanism, some errors still happen sometimes. These
are mutations, they’re harmful, disfiguring, destroying, weak. Messes with the DNA to change
what it changes and then pass the changes to the offspring.

I made experiments on the Drbsophilia Melanogaster and I found out that when we expose
them to X rays, the rate of mutations increased by 150 times more. That allowed me to study
mutations more and I raised 900 generations of them, millions of mutations happened, millions.
But despite that, all the generations I got from mutations were disfigured monsters that can’t
even escape from the experiment container and if they do they die. And I never got even 1 good
mutation and I did it over and over for years and always the same result. Mutations are harmful
by nature and it can’t be right that the scientists make it the mechanism of evolution because
they can’t find any other ones.

Then Dawkins said :

No, mutations can be good and when it’s good natural selection chooses it to survive and be
passed to the offspring, there are examples of good, famous mutations, not only good, but it
added new qualities to the being that didn’t exist before and it proves that mutations can create
new info.

Then Adam said :

You have to provide an example sir.

Dawkins said :

Fine, we have lots of examples of good mutations. Astyanax Mexicanus for example, it’s eyes
because of the darkness in caves were exposed to harmful accidents, so it was beneficial for it to
replace it’s eyes with normal texture and a mutation happened and the eyes were changed to
texture, then it became a fish with blind texture instead of eyes, that’s a good mutation.
Another example is the beetles of Madeira Island. Because they live in a stormy island, air
always pushes their wings and throw them in the sea, when a mutation makes it without wings,
it’s chance of survival is better.

Muller responded and said :

That actually proves that the mutations are destroying, even when they wanted to come with
examples about how mutations are good, they couldn’t get any example but destroying ones
that destroyed useful qualities. What happened to Astyanax Mexicanus is that it’s eyes was
destroyed, which actually turned out to benefit it. And in the beetles case they lost their wings,
which actually turned out to benefit them. These are the best examples ever of good mutations
and they’re not enough AT ALL to explain anything but how different species can be under the
same genus. The fish was still a fish, is still a fish and will stay a fish forever. The beetle was and
still and will be a beetle. We want mutations that explain how new info can be created, not
mutations which cause slight different that in 99% of the times is very harmful. The mutations
can’t create something complex and weird like the sonar system in the dolphin or the radar in
the bat or the electrical cells in some fish. In conclusion, the mutations can’t add another organ
to any being.

Dawkins said :

When you look at the mosquito and find out that it could evolve a more strong immune system
against the pesticides in just 40 years, isn’t that an evolution in front of our eyes ?

Muller responded :

No ? Isn’t the mosquito still a mosquito ? It haven’t turned into anything else
Dawkins said in a serious tone :

That only happened in 40 years and evolution needs millions of years and in only 40 years it
evolved like that

Muller responded :

Not because it evolved like that in 40 years it will turn into an elephant in a million, mutations
have a limit. It’s not about how much the change is, it’s about the type of change itself. And the
type of change the evolutionists always present us is the complete opposite of what they need
to prove their theory. They use examples like Bacteria or mosquito’s immune systems, use it to
prove the public that the single-cellular organisms have evolved for millions of years to horses
and lions and elephants and dinosaurs and the microbe can someway evolve into a human.

Then Muller Said :

99% of the mutations are harmful, 99% without exaggeration. Cancer, Anemia, Alzheimer,
diabetes, some other stuff like progeria which makes kids’ faces like old men, dawn syndrome,
people like the elephant man, Mediterranean fever, dwarfism, albinism and lots of other really
bad diseases and syndromes. We can’t ignore 99% and take 1% and approve it as a mechanism
of all the wonders and miracles of evolution. If It’s actually logical, those mutations would lead
species to extinction, not evolution.

Then Muller finished and said :

The genetic information which are being copied in the DNA are like the lines that are written by
a typewriter over and over, the mutation is a typographical error happens during the copying
process and result in distorted lines, they say that these distorted lines are the reason of all
beauty in the world and nature nowadays. But disfiguration can’t explain anything except one
thing, DEATH.

Dawkins said in tone the sounded like he didn’t care about all of that :

It’s not adding a new gene, it’s a copying of an already existing one, the gene that was called X
for example became XX, you didn’t create a new gene or info, it’s the same info but they’re
repeated. And all the mutation mechanisms never add any new info, it’s all editing in the
already existing ones, whatever that type of editing is, some mutations are substituted, they
substitute the already existing genes. And some are a lack of a gene or a non-found part and
another gene the same thing and then these two parts together make a new gene, but the info
are the same info that exist in these two genes, never added new info. That’s the limit of how
mutations can mess with genetics. You say that mutations are harmful and disfiguring because
of it’s nature and because the rule of the gene pool, it can’t explain how a genus can evolve to a
completely different one and that the limit of it’s explanation is how different species can come
from one genus. And I have a question for you, these beings that are the ancestors of all the
living beings today, where did they come from if they didn’t evolve from one another ?

Muller responded :

You ask for the origins of the ancestors and how they came to life, if we knew that there’s 1000
genus of fishes and 500 genus of amphibious and 1100 genus of reptiles and 1800 genus of birds
and 1200 genus of mammals, these are 5600 genus of ancestors who lived on the land awnd in
the sea 1 day, some mutation happened and by the rule of surviving of the fittest a 70
thousands of vertebrates exist today. Yes, evolution can explain how those 5600 genus had
70000 of decedents species, but how did those 5600 genus come to Earth in the first place ?
Science doesn’t know yet. One of those 5600 genus is the human who became the master of all
the creatures on earth and colonized the land and the sea. Notice how I only talked about the
vertebrates ? I didn’t talk about the 150 thousand genus of insects that became more than 1
million species nowadays. Nor did I talk about the plant’s kingdom nor the bacteria’s kingdom
nor the algae kingdom nor the fungus’s kingdom. Hundreds of thousands of genus came to life
out of nowhere and no one knows how, Did God create them ? Maybe, some scientists believe
in that and they’re called the creationists.

Adam said :

Some creationists try to match between evolution and creation, they say even though mutations
are harmful and random, they are directed by God himself with complete care. They call it the
directed mutations, directed by God. And that LUCA was made by God and he put all the info in
it and directed to mutations to help evolution.

Muller said :

The scientific community rejects that God may be interfering with anything in life, they believe
it’s against science.

Adam responded :

But they believe in coincidences and absurd when they’re practically impossible, isn’t God sound
more logical ?

Muller responded :
That’s how the scientific community is in modern age, but your assumption is scientifically and
genetically inaccurate, there’s no being with all the info of another one, and we don’t accept
assumptions here, especially if they’re inaccurate.

Adam said to him :

As long as there’s no proof of a genus evolving to another one, then it simply doesn’t exist.

Dawkins then said :

Of course there’s a proof, many proofs. Have you forgotten about the fossils ? Many fossils are
in the fossils record and fossils for normal beings, but for transition beings between the classes
and they prove that evolution is a fact just like the sun in the sky.

Adam started thinking for a while and then said :

The fossils, hmmm, nice proof, the fossils can’t lie, so be it then. Ah on the occasion of the
fossils, I see that the hologram has prepared a surprise for us, but we’ll see it in part two after a
short break and be sure that the surprise will completely answer your question.