wazua Fri, Aug 8, 2025
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In

7 Pages«<4567>
Resurrection day
AlphDoti
#101 Posted : Friday, July 01, 2016 4:14:09 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 6/20/2008
Posts: 6,275
Location: Kenya
I repeat again: nobody can resurrect.

Remember a resurrected person for example should be same person that died before. We are not talking genes selection of a person and cloning, which is ideally artificial conception.

There are four means which have been used to bring up a being:
4. From a female alone
3. From a female and a male
2. From a male alone
1. From no male and no female

Yes, science can do 2, 3 and 4. Where 2 & 4 are cloning.

SCIENCE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO DO No.1
tycho
#102 Posted : Sunday, July 03, 2016 10:22:05 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
masukuma wrote:
thuks wrote:
tycho wrote:
@AlphDoti, when you explain how the father and son aren't the same I can understand.

The problem arises when you try to differentiate the clone from the original. So I'll ask again, what makes them unequal or different, since as you've conceded, the difference isn't genetic? Certainly the father-son analogy doesn't help!


Though not sure, but a human is a product of the genes and social / environmental influences. These influence would make it difficult to 'resurrect' @alph grandpa

the differences in experiences will define a person - biologically the two would be the same but not as a person. things like what you were fed when you were young, what you saw and experienced. e.t.c. defined 'you'. even if it was possible to clone a grown-up. they would only be similar at the time of cloning and they would be more and more different as time went by - only being 'one' in their experiences.


This argument isn't enough to differentiate between the clone and the original. Why?

1. The difference between genetics and experience isn't clear. For example, does genetics determine experience? To what extent? Do experiences determine genes?

2. If your argument is true then identity would depend on memory. But what would happen when memory is lost?

3. It's possible to have the same experiences for both the clone and the original even from birth. Would such a case make them differentiable?

Experience and genetics in these cases wouldn't help to differentiate the clone from the original. What we have here is a hunch that they are different but we aren't clear about what differentiates them.
tycho
#103 Posted : Sunday, July 03, 2016 10:27:20 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
AlphDoti wrote:
I repeat again: nobody can resurrect.

Remember a resurrected person for example should be same person that died before. We are not talking genes selection of a person and cloning, which is ideally artificial conception.

There are four means which have been used to bring up a being:
4. From a female alone
3. From a female and a male
2. From a male alone
1. From no male and no female

Yes, science can do 2, 3 and 4. Where 2 & 4 are cloning.

SCIENCE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO DO No.1


Unfortunately, for resurrection doesn't need proposition no.1.

Again, proposition no.1 is vague. What's male/female? A set of Chromosomes? Then that would translate to all the propositions you've given being equivalent! Or, point one would be invalid for all conceivable entities... even God.
tycho
#104 Posted : Sunday, July 03, 2016 11:01:07 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Wakanyugi wrote:
tycho wrote:

My response is that if it's at least theoretically conceivable that the technologies and methods of science as of today can solve this problem then @AlphDoti's argument will fail. And this indeed is the case.

Starting with possibility of a synthetic protocell, engineered dna and a quantum computer powerful enough and at least through an ingenious use of simultaneous and non-linear mathematical operations it's possible to recreate (resurrect, in fact) both great grandparents, and consequently, recreate(resurrect) the grandfather.



I have been following at least two approaches that Science is testing, towards achieving imortality. If we are lucky we might live to see both of them demonstrated convincingly:

1. Interfering with the human body by: slowing aging, cryogenics, cloning... for instance, to make people live longer. The biggest proponent of this approach is of course Ray Kurzweil

2. Isolating consciousness (the essence of what it means to be a human being) so that it can be saved on computer drives or transferred from one vehicle to another.

Both of these approaches will have a massive impact on society - starting with a complete recasting of what it means to be a human 'being'- and the entire ethical moral, economic, religious, cultural and social edifice that has been constructed upon this foundation.

I am not surprised that people like Alphadoti and his co-religionists are worried, or in denial. I think I would be too if I was invested in the supposed infallibility of a 2000 year old belief system.



There's this movie, 'Risen', have you watched it?

It's about a Roman investigator/tribune, who's tasked to find Christ's body... as I watched the movie I got another idea- there exists a science of the soul that's different from the sciences we're used to. The scriptures were written based on this science, that's why we're so lost when we read them by the eyes of the body system.

Man has always had the power for immortality and ressurection... For our generation I suspect we're the victims of a lost system of knowledge and development. Maybe it's a nuance of tradition. For example, tradition close to this science in the Western world seems to pause at the stakes when Giordano Bruno was burnt. But now it's rising again and will be perhaps unstoppable.

So counting the two possible paths you've mentioned I can see other methods probably even easier to execute...
Wakanyugi
#105 Posted : Monday, July 04, 2016 2:09:50 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 7/3/2007
Posts: 1,635
tycho wrote:
Wakanyugi wrote:
[quote=tycho]


There's this movie, 'Risen', have you watched it?

It's about a Roman investigator/tribune, who's tasked to find Christ's body... as I watched the movie I got another idea- there exists a science of the soul that's different from the sciences we're used to. The scriptures were written based on this science, that's why we're so lost when we read them by the eyes of the body system.

Man has always had the power for immortality and resurrection... For our generation I suspect we're the victims of a lost system of knowledge and development. Maybe it's a nuance of tradition. For example, tradition close to this science in the Western world seems to pause at the stakes when Giordano Bruno was burnt. But now it's rising again and will be perhaps unstoppable.

So counting the two possible paths you've mentioned I can see other methods probably even easier to execute...


Tycho; I have not watched 'Risen' but, now that you mention it, I will look for the movie.

I have highlighted one sentence above because in my opinion it goes to the core of this matter, namely:

'We can not die, we do not die.'

We animate different vehicles from time time depending on need. But those vehicles are not 'us' anymore than our clothes are. We can't even spend more that 24 hours in our human body without collapsing from lack of sleep.

I don't know where this belief that being alive equals animating our biological vehicles came from (although I do admit such a belief has definite evolutionary value). But it is not true.

So you can actually see even the argument for resurrection is somewhat moot...resurrection from what? Perhaps 'waking up' would be a better term.

But if such a discussion helps us to appreciate and maybe acknowledge our grater reality, one in which immortality is a given, not a gift accorded by a distant deity if we behave ourselves, then it is all good.
"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
AlphDoti
#106 Posted : Monday, July 04, 2016 2:46:26 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 6/20/2008
Posts: 6,275
Location: Kenya
Wakanyugi wrote:
tycho wrote:
Wakanyugi wrote:
[quote=tycho]

There's this movie, 'Risen', have you watched it?

It's about a Roman investigator/tribune, who's tasked to find Christ's body... as I watched the movie I got another idea- there exists a science of the soul that's different from the sciences we're used to. The scriptures were written based on this science, that's why we're so lost when we read them by the eyes of the body system.

Man has always had the power for immortality and resurrection... For our generation I suspect we're the victims of a lost system of knowledge and development. Maybe it's a nuance of tradition. For example, tradition close to this science in the Western world seems to pause at the stakes when Giordano Bruno was burnt. But now it's rising again and will be perhaps unstoppable.

So counting the two possible paths you've mentioned I can see other methods probably even easier to execute...


Tycho; I have not watched 'Risen' but, now that you mention it, I will look for the movie.

I have highlighted one sentence above because in my opinion it goes to the core of this matter, namely:

'We can not die, we do not die.'

We animate different vehicles from time time depending on need. But those vehicles are not 'us' anymore than our clothes are. We can't even spend more that 24 hours in our human body without collapsing from lack of sleep.

I don't know where this belief that being alive equals animating our biological vehicles came from (although I do admit such a belief has definite evolutionary value). But it is not true.

So you can actually see even the argument for resurrection is somewhat moot... resurrection from what? Perhaps 'waking up' would be a better term.

But if such a discussion helps us to appreciate and maybe acknowledge our grater reality, one in which immortality is a given, not a gift accorded by a distant deity if we behave ourselves, then it is all good.

My understand of resurrection is: bring back a dead person back from its dust and ash or wax, make the body alive again.

AlphDoti
#107 Posted : Monday, July 04, 2016 3:22:21 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 6/20/2008
Posts: 6,275
Location: Kenya
tycho wrote:
Soon, it will be possible to resurrect the dead- hint: existence is now increasingly being seen as a simulation, and many other reasons thankfully under the scope that many seem to trust, science...

Or think of the mummified remains of Egypt's early rulers. @tycho, can science make their bodies alive again and they can actually be themselves?

This is what I mean by saying: IMPOSSIBLE.
Wakanyugi
#108 Posted : Monday, July 04, 2016 3:54:11 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 7/3/2007
Posts: 1,635
AlphDoti wrote:
Wakanyugi wrote:
tycho wrote:
[quote=Wakanyugi][quote=tycho]

There's this movie, 'Risen', have you watched it?

It's about a Roman investigator/tribune, who's tasked to find Christ's body... as I watched the movie I got another idea- there exists a science of the soul that's different from the sciences we're used to. The scriptures were written based on this science, that's why we're so lost when we read them by the eyes of the body system.

Man has always had the power for immortality and resurrection... For our generation I suspect we're the victims of a lost system of knowledge and development. Maybe it's a nuance of tradition. For example, tradition close to this science in the Western world seems to pause at the stakes when Giordano Bruno was burnt. But now it's rising again and will be perhaps unstoppable.

So counting the two possible paths you've mentioned I can see other methods probably even easier to execute...


Tycho; I have not watched 'Risen' but, now that you mention it, I will look for the movie.

I have highlighted one sentence above because in my opinion it goes to the core of this matter, namely:

'We can not die, we do not die.'

We animate different vehicles from time time depending on need. But those vehicles are not 'us' anymore than our clothes are. We can't even spend more that 24 hours in our human body without collapsing from lack of sleep.

I don't know where this belief that being alive equals animating our biological vehicles came from (although I do admit such a belief has definite evolutionary value). But it is not true.

So you can actually see even the argument for resurrection is somewhat moot... resurrection from what? Perhaps 'waking up' would be a better term.

But if such a discussion helps us to appreciate and maybe acknowledge our grater reality, one in which immortality is a given, not a gift accorded by a distant deity if we behave ourselves, then it is all good.

My understand of resurrection is: bring back a dead person back from its dust and ash or wax, make the body alive again.


Understood. But that, I am arguing is a limited, in fact erroneous characterization. Our life does not start when we animate a body, nor does it end when we leave. In fact I would dare say, this is a cardinal teaching of most religions but has been misrepresented by interpreters of faith. Perhaps because the threat of death is such a powerful tool of control?

"Before you were in your mothers womb, I knew you" says the Bible.

As for bringing a 'dead person back from its dust and ash or wax body to life,' why would one even want to do that? OK I do get your point here but I repeat this a limiting characterization.

The essence of who we are is not limited to the bodies we own, anymore than we are limited to the clothes we wear or the cars we drive. In fact we are not limited to the dimension we occupy. To our greater self then, time and space are mere illusions, meaning no start, no end.

How then could life and death be real? Wherefore resurrection?


"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
Wakanyugi
#109 Posted : Monday, July 04, 2016 4:02:12 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 7/3/2007
Posts: 1,635
AlphDoti wrote:
Wakanyugi wrote:
Anti_Burglar wrote:
I have been watchingn and now I have to say something. I find it disturbing how Alphdoti is being slippery around our revered thinkers and they cannot pin him down even in one lousy point.

Wakanyugi, like an enzyme, has confessed he is not active on Alphdoti's substrate while Tycho is still 'preparing a response' whatever that means and Maskums is asking about amoebas .... C'mon guys, bana. Is it a slow day or what?

Where is the passion, the fire with which you have scorched believers and they ran back to their gods in tears weeping at the rought treatment you meted to them?

hehehehe.

This argument seems to assume that Alphadoti is an intellectual lightweight, he is not. He just happens to like religion very much.

As for me, I have a policy not to argue with religion, unless I am practicing my favorite hobby - baiting the cacophonous citizens of the Christian right.

Plus I happen to like Mullah Alph since that day he resisted putting a fatwa on me after I had confessed to, uhm....liberating a Koran.

@Wakanyugi, which one was it smile smile smile smile


Alphadoti: as a recovering Catholic, I only bait Christian Fundamentalists. From the way they screwed up my young mind, I believe they owe me that much.
"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
Swenani
#110 Posted : Monday, July 04, 2016 4:20:10 PM
Rank: User


Joined: 8/15/2013
Posts: 13,237
Location: Vacuum
Wakanyugi wrote:
AlphDoti wrote:
Wakanyugi wrote:
Anti_Burglar wrote:
I have been watchingn and now I have to say something. I find it disturbing how Alphdoti is being slippery around our revered thinkers and they cannot pin him down even in one lousy point.

Wakanyugi, like an enzyme, has confessed he is not active on Alphdoti's substrate while Tycho is still 'preparing a response' whatever that means and Maskums is asking about amoebas .... C'mon guys, bana. Is it a slow day or what?

Where is the passion, the fire with which you have scorched believers and they ran back to their gods in tears weeping at the rought treatment you meted to them?

hehehehe.

This argument seems to assume that Alphadoti is an intellectual lightweight, he is not. He just happens to like religion very much.

As for me, I have a policy not to argue with religion, unless I am practicing my favorite hobby - baiting the cacophonous citizens of the Christian right.

Plus I happen to like Mullah Alph since that day he resisted putting a fatwa on me after I had confessed to, uhm....liberating a Koran.

@Wakanyugi, which one was it smile smile smile smile


Alphadoti: as a recovering Catholic, I only bait Christian Fundamentalists. From the way they screwed up my young mind, I believe they owe me that much.


smile smile smile smile

@wakanyugi, are you an atheist?
If Obiero did it, Who Am I?
Wakanyugi
#111 Posted : Monday, July 04, 2016 5:08:03 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 7/3/2007
Posts: 1,635
Swenani wrote:
Wakanyugi wrote:
AlphDoti wrote:
Wakanyugi wrote:
Anti_Burglar wrote:
I have been watchingn and now I have to say something. I find it disturbing how Alphdoti is being slippery around our revered thinkers and they cannot pin him down even in one lousy point.

Wakanyugi, like an enzyme, has confessed he is not active on Alphdoti's substrate while Tycho is still 'preparing a response' whatever that means and Maskums is asking about amoebas .... C'mon guys, bana. Is it a slow day or what?

Where is the passion, the fire with which you have scorched believers and they ran back to their gods in tears weeping at the rought treatment you meted to them?

hehehehe.

This argument seems to assume that Alphadoti is an intellectual lightweight, he is not. He just happens to like religion very much.

As for me, I have a policy not to argue with religion, unless I am practicing my favorite hobby - baiting the cacophonous citizens of the Christian right.

Plus I happen to like Mullah Alph since that day he resisted putting a fatwa on me after I had confessed to, uhm....liberating a Koran.

@Wakanyugi, which one was it smile smile smile smile


Alphadoti: as a recovering Catholic, I only bait Christian Fundamentalists. From the way they screwed up my young mind, I believe they owe me that much.


smile smile smile smile

@wakanyugi, are you an atheist?


No.

But I no longer subscribe to organized religion.

I believe one should have a private relationship with his god, whoever he conceptualizes him/her/it to be.
"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
tycho
#112 Posted : Tuesday, July 05, 2016 8:19:59 AM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
AlphDoti wrote:
tycho wrote:
Soon, it will be possible to resurrect the dead- hint: existence is now increasingly being seen as a simulation, and many other reasons thankfully under the scope that many seem to trust, science...

Or think of the mummified remains of Egypt's early rulers. @tycho, can science make their bodies alive again and they can actually be themselves?

This is what I mean by saying: IMPOSSIBLE.


Yes. They can be made to live again. And they can be 'themselves'.
Wakanyugi
#113 Posted : Tuesday, July 05, 2016 3:06:41 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 7/3/2007
Posts: 1,635
Tycho: I have come to appreciate the provocative way your mind works, even at those times I find myself disagreeing with you. But on the topic of resurrection, I fear we are missing out on something important, perhaps because of the distraction with the issue of dying.

The obsession that humans have for immortality is one resistance to the illusion we call life on earth. We know, deep within us that we are immortal, that in fact we elected to go into this dream of earthly existence for specific reasons. But the dream has become so powerful that few of us can see beyond it without help.

We have even called amongst us such masters as Jesus, Mohamed, Buddha, Bahaulah, Zoroaster etc to help us awake.

At some point this penchant for immortality became conflated with the longevity, of lack of it, of the human body. The point that our sojourn here is merely a blip on an a massive trip through eternity got completely lost.

As often happens both science and religion have weighed in on the matter, in the process causing lots of confusion and missing the true point completely. One of the sages named above is said to have remarked on this irony, that "the same people who want to live for eternity do not know what to do with themselves on a Sunday afternoon," especially now that the Premier league is off.

How strange.


"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
tycho
#114 Posted : Tuesday, July 05, 2016 10:07:27 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
@Wakanyugi, I agree with you that Man may be immortal. But there's a complication, perhaps out of necessity.

1. A person becomes or is created when a legitimating authority in a society declares an entity to be so, and the legitimated responds and abides in such a relationship.

2. The relationship is that person's soul.

3. Death is when such a relationship can ONLY be experienced with reference to the past and without the legitimated participating actively in it.

4. Life is when the relationship is in the present and continuing and the legitimated is active.

Thus the question of resurrection is one that's contained in a specific space time line of progression.

If my definitions are true then resurrection becomes awfully important. Think of it as proof for immortality, and even as a resource.

Remember the question of resurrection is also one of time travel.

Wakanyugi
#115 Posted : Wednesday, July 06, 2016 12:53:43 AM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 7/3/2007
Posts: 1,635
tycho wrote:
@Wakanyugi, I agree with you that Man may be immortal. But there's a complication, perhaps out of necessity.

1. A person becomes or is created when a legitimating authority in a society declares an entity to be so, and the legitimated responds and abides in such a relationship.



But which authority is this? God? Your parents? The local Chief?


Sorry if my questions above sound facetious. I could not help it.

But, seriously, you sell yourself very short here. Your life is not owed to a legitimizing authority. You are an infinite, multidimensional entity that happens to be having an experience, one of many, as a human BEING. You are God playing small.

Our Earth walk involves many strange things including: playing at being limited; pretending separation and doing everything we can to create a consensus reality (an unconscious attempt to recreate unity). In this drama many illusions become all encompassing including: that our life is limited to the experience on earth or that we are subject to a legitimizing authority. But none of this is real.

At the risk of sounding tedious I repeat: we are not our bodies; we are not limited to the period our bodies can exist; this experience we are having on earth is important but just one of many; we never die; we are primarily non physical beings having a physical experience, for a time; we are only limited by those barriers that we can build, no more.


"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
tycho
#116 Posted : Wednesday, July 06, 2016 7:48:41 AM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Personhood, or the 'soul' is only an emergent feature peculiar to society. Different societies may refer to different legitimators. Some will say 'God', others 'Karma'.

In some instances individuals play a narrower role like in the example of Victor the boy of Aveyron, or William James Sidis.

Remember @Wakanyugi, if it's just a matter of transitioning along different vehicles and states in the universe then technically, everything is immortal. But this may not fit in a society. Societies are not just goal oriented but are also necessarily selective of reality. That is, society carries within it the limits of immortality.
tycho
#117 Posted : Wednesday, July 06, 2016 8:11:05 AM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Non human societies like those of ants or Chimps have their own legitimators that may differ from human institutions only in degree.
Wakanyugi
#118 Posted : Wednesday, July 06, 2016 12:31:02 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 7/3/2007
Posts: 1,635
tycho wrote:
Personhood, or the 'soul' is only an emergent feature peculiar to society. Different societies may refer to different legitimators. Some will say 'God', others 'Karma'.


Brother Tycho: Life on Earth is challenging. So I fully understand why we would need crutches - legitimators as you term it. Science, religion, politics are similar such crutches. Books, TV, social media... are crutches too.

But, just like we grew from babyhood to become adults and assume responsibilities, we need to grow up as human beings - wake up to the realization that these crutches are not real. We don't need legitimators, we are not dependent on any authority except the one we set over ourselves. We are not limited by any barriers save those we have constructed.

Marianne Williamson has argued that it is our greatness that scares us, thus the obsessive attachment to this state of 'smallness.' I think it is time to get past all that. That is all I am saying.

Now I take a break
"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
tycho
#119 Posted : Wednesday, July 06, 2016 3:30:22 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Everything in the universe is limited, even the universe itself is limited. Even God, I have come to realize, is limited. So the proposition that humans are unlimited is not only false, but probably also misguided.

The reasons for my assertion are based on the evidence of laws, and form. In that all things are governed by laws, and all things are energic.

Because of this, all things will transform to other things and not just maintain what we may call immortality, but all things are reversible.

When you, @Wakanyugi says, 'we' you enter into legitimization, albeit, unconsciously. All language, all communication, even at the most basic forms of being like strings or even the most elementary particles exhibit legitimization. Legitimization isn't a crutch. It's the way of nature.

But I can understand why you'd take a negative view of it. One reason could be how oppressive it may be in reality. 'Black lives matter' may be an example.

The good news is that by understanding how legitimization works we can outgrow some of the disadvantages that come with it. We can learn to optimize our abilities and experiences better.

I'd be most inconsiderate not to allow you a break. I think I also need one. But before that, thank you so much for your thought and company.
Wakanyugi
#120 Posted : Wednesday, July 06, 2016 4:47:51 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 7/3/2007
Posts: 1,635
tycho wrote:
Everything in the universe is limited, even the universe itself is limited. Even God, I have come to realize, is limited. So the proposition that humans are unlimited is not only false, but probably also misguided.

The reasons for my assertion are based on the evidence of laws, and form. In that all things are governed by laws, and all things are energic.

Because of this, all things will transform to other things and not just maintain what we may call immortality, but all things are reversible.

When you, @Wakanyugi says, 'we' you enter into legitimization, albeit, unconsciously. All language, all communication, even at the most basic forms of being like strings or even the most elementary particles exhibit legitimization. Legitimization isn't a crutch. It's the way of nature.

But I can understand why you'd take a negative view of it. One reason could be how oppressive it may be in reality. 'Black lives matter' may be an example.

The good news is that by understanding how legitimization works we can outgrow some of the disadvantages that come with it. We can learn to optimize our abilities and experiences better.

I'd be most inconsiderate not to allow you a break. I think I also need one. But before that, thank you so much for your thought and company.


Thank you Tycho.

On this note we can disagree to disagree.smile

The unlimited self, of which I speak, needs no defender and therefore nothing more need be said on the subject.

Peace


"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
Users browsing this topic
Guest
7 Pages«<4567>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Copyright © 2025 Wazua.co.ke. All Rights Reserved.