“If you can read this sentence, I can prove God exists”

See this blog post I just wrote, that you’re reading right now?  This blog article is proof of the existence of God.

Before you read/watch/listen to “If You Can Read This I Can Prove God Exists,” read THIS first. (700 words – 2 minutes) – then come back and continue reading. Thanks.

Yeah, I know, that sounds crazy.  But I’m not asking you to believe anything just yet, until you see the evidence for yourself.  All I ask is that you refrain from disbelieving while I show you my proof.  It only takes a minute to convey, but it speaks to one of the most important questions of all time.

So how is this message proof of the existence of God?

This web page you’re reading contains letters, words and sentences.  It contains a message that means something. As long as you can read English, you can understand what I’m saying.

You can do all kinds of things with this message.  You can read it on your computer screen.  You can print it out on your printer.  You can read it out loud to a friend who’s in the same room as you are.  You can call your friend and read it to her over the telephone.  You can save it as a Microsoft WORD document.  You can forward it to someone via email, or you can post it on some other website.

Regardless of how you copy it or where you send it, the information remains the same.  My email contains a message. It contains information in the form of language.  The message is independent of the medium it is sent in.

Messages are not matter, even though they can be carried by matter (like printing this email on a piece of paper).

Messages are not energy even though they can be carried by energy (like the sound of my voice.)

Messages are immaterial.  Information is itself a unique kind of entity.  It can be stored and transmitted and copied in many forms, but the meaning still stays the same.

Messages can be in English, French or Chinese. Or Morse Code.  Or mating calls of birds.  Or the Internet.  Or radio or television.  Or computer programs or architect blueprints or stone carvings.  Every cell in your body contains a message encoded in DNA, representing a complete plan for you.

OK, so what does this have to do with God?

It’s very simple.  Messages, languages, and coded information ONLY come from a mind.  A mind that agrees on an alphabet and a meaning of words and sentences.  A mind that expresses both desire and intent.

Whether I use the simplest possible explanation, such as the one I’m giving you here, or if we analyze language with advanced mathematics and engineering communication theory, we can say this with total confidence:

“Messages, languages and coded information never, ever come from anything else besides a mind.  No one has ever produced a single example of a message that did not come from a mind.”

Nature can create fascinating patterns – snowflakes, sand dunes, crystals, stalagmites and stalactites.  Tornadoes and turbulence and cloud formations.

But non-living things cannot create language. They *cannot* create codes.  Rocks cannot think and they cannot talk.  And they cannot create information.

It is believed by some that life on planet earth arose accidentally from the “primordial soup,” the early ocean which produced enzymes and eventually RNA, DNA, and primitive cells.

But there is still a problem with this theory: It fails to answer the question, ‘Where did the information come from?’

DNA is not merely a molecule.  Nor is it simply a “pattern.” Yes, it contains chemicals and proteins, but those chemicals are arranged to form an intricate language, in the exact same way that English and Chinese and HTML are languages.

DNA has a four-letter alphabet, and structures very similar to words, sentences and paragraphs.  With very precise instructions and systems that check for errors and correct them. It is formally and scientifically a code. All codes we know the origin of are designed.

To the person who says that life arose naturally, you need only ask: “Where did the information come from? Show me just ONE example of a language that didn’t come from a mind.”

As simple as this question is, I’ve personally presented it in public presentations and Internet discussion forums for more than four years.  I’ve addressed more than 100,000 people, including hostile, skeptical audiences who insist that life arose without the assistance of God.

But to a person, none of them have ever been able to explain where the information came from.  This riddle is “So simple any child can understand; so complex, no atheist can solve.”

You can hear or read my full presentation on this topic at

Watch it on video:

Matter and energy have to come from somewhere.  Everyone can agree on that.  But information has to come from somewhere, too!

Information is separate entity, fully on par with matter and energy.  And information can only come from a mind.  If books and poems and TV shows come from human intelligence, then all living things inevitably came from a superintelligence.

Every word you hear, every sentence you speak, every dog that barks, every song you sing, every email you read, every packet of information that zings across the Internet, is proof of the existence of God.  Because information and language always originate in a mind.

In the beginning were words and language.

In the Beginning was Information.

When we consider the mystery of life – where it came from and how this miracle is possible – do we not at the same time ask the question where it is going, and what its purpose is?

Respectfully Submitted,

Perry Marshall

Full Presentation and Technical Details (please review before posting questions or debates on the blog, almost every question and objection is addressed by these articles):

“If you can read this, I can prove God exists” – listen to
my full presentation or read the Executive Summary here:


“OK, so then who made God?” and other questions about information and origins:


Why DNA is formally and scientifically a code, and things like sunlight and starlight are not (Please read this before you attempt to debate this on the blog!!!):

//evo2.org/blog/information-theory-made-simple and //evo2.org/faq/#code

-The Atheist’s Riddle: Members of Infidels, the world’s largest atheist discussion board attempt to solve it
(for over 4 years now!), without success:


1,937 Responses

  1. Anastasia Beaverhausen says:

    Show me just ONE example of a language that didn’t come from a mind.” DNA.

  2. Sieb Kramer says:

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Really enjoyed thinking about what you said! Now don’t get me wrong, I respect any kind of believe that one might have, and as an atheist I know I also just believe in atheism without being able to fully prove it. But I’m gonna try to explain my atheist kind of view on your point.

    First of all: I think non-living things are also able to give messages. Stars for example. If you see a star in the sky, you know it’s out there, because it shines a light. Technically that’s a message, because it gives you information about the position of the star. The problem with messages from non-living things is that they cannot be read by other non-living things, because they don’t have brains. So there’s no communication. It’s one way information sharing.
    Therefore, there can’t be communication. What’s also a problem about non-living-thing-messages, is that the thing cant control the message, because it doesn’t know that it’s sending a message. So there is no way it’s message sending skills could improve, and therefore it’s been the same since the beginning of time.

    Now, a living thing can in fact get a message from a non living thing. We are the living thing and the star is the living thing. So what is it that makes it possible for a living thing to send and understand complicated messages?
    I’m gonna tell you the problem with that question. We humans tend to look at ourselves first, and let us present the communication skills of the whole living world. But we’re simply not. We are the result of millions of years of evolution. We’ve got possibly the most advanced minds and communication skills of all organisms. Not all animals can handle complicated messages. Some don’t even have eyes and ears ans all other stuff. They’re pretty bad communicators. There are some that don’t even have brains, like amoeba. If a species doesn’t has a brain, it can’t understand messages. So there’s no communication. No information sharing. And that’s only the animals. Plants, fungi, bacteria, all of them don’t have brains, and therefore, most of them can’t communicate.

    So in my opinion, your statement is very true but incomplete. Of course non-living things can send messages, they just can’t control and understand them. So they’re just useless messages. The difference between living things and non-living things isn’t that they can’t send messages, it’s just that non-living can’t do anything with those messages. It ain’t messages that makes life special, it’s communication: being able to successfully send and receive useful messages So is that what’s the difference? Being able to communicate? Is that what it means to be alive? No it’s not. Because not all living things are able to do that. The first animals weren’t able to communicate. They were just brainless clumbs of cells floating around in the ocean. So that means life was already around before communication were even a thing. So that means that communication originated from a time later in the history of life. As a matter of fact, most species around today can’t even communicate. Because it comes so natural to us humans, and we only interact with species who can also communicate, we’ll easily make the mistake to think that all life can communicate. But it doesn’t. But bacteria, plants, fungi and even most animals can’t communicate, aka send messages, as you said in your speech.

    So if God made life, he must have added the ability to communicate later on. It can’t have been around since the beginning. Or he didn’t create life, he just added communication to living things that already existed.

    I know what I did here is a little mean, because I just took down your statement without telling you where I think communication came from. So I owe you that

    So where does this communication come from? Well, in my atheist point of view, I believe in evolution. I know you might not, but I’m gonna need it to explain my next point. So just pretend it’s true.
    Imagine a time long ago, when there were some animals around, but none of them had evolved a brain yet. In this period, life lived only in the sea, and the animal kingdom was still very small. It consisted mainly of one-celled animals, and some small multi-celled ones. Those animals weren’t able to think, but they were able to move. They were mainy floating in the sea, but they managed to get at a point that they could move to places that were safe to them. I don’t know how exactly this came to be, but I can give you an example of how it could have happened. (I warn you, it’s gonna be pretty long so you might just as well skip the next alinea and just assume some animal species somehow managed to move away.)

    These animals were still very primitive, and therefore vulnerable. A lot of them died of natural events like toxic gas bubbles and extreme temperatures. Let’s say there was an area in the sea where some toxic gasses were released every now and then. There was a bunch of primitive animals living here, and of course they repoduced so they all lived here together. But sadly, every time this gas gets released, most of them die. Then it takes meaby a few hundred years before another load of gas gets released, and in the meantime, the population is able to rebuild itself. So every time, only the ones who survived are able to reproduce, and create a new generation. After a couple of hundred generations, a pattern starts to reveal itself. Every time the gashole releases gas, the ones who were the furthest away were able to survive more often. So after thousands of years, only animals who get  the furthest away from the gashole are left. After millions of years, the species will be  filtred so well on getting away from danger, that it starts to get better and better in getting away. And there you’ve got it: the first example of movement. These animals don’t know what they’re doing, but something in the DNA now stores a gene that makes it possible for these animals to get away. Not that they thought about it, it just happend. It became a reflex. Everytime there was a sign the gas might explode, they moved away.

    So now the animals could move. They learned a lot of stuff this way, and they got a whole lot of different kinds of reflexes over time, because it raised the survival chances. At some point, the animals got special cells to store this information. Over time, a small organ came to be that consisted of cells that contained information about those reflexes. This was the very first beginning of a brain. It wasn’t all that complex at the time. Just cells storing information in their cores about reflexes. But it made it much more easy for those animals to survive. It was a major advantage. And as always if the history of life: the ones with the most reflexes survived the most. Over millions of generations, the brains were filtered out so well, that they became way  more complex. Eventually, the brains were able to store so much information, it was only a matter of time before the animals were able to react on their environment. They developed organs to sense. Like organs to sense light, that eventually became the first eyes. This was super useful for small animals to get away from danger, like ancient predators such as anomalocaris. And sense of taste, because only the animals that ate stuff that wasn’t poisoning them were able to survive, and  the ability to have an idea of what you’re eating is really important. So senses came to be. Animals were able to pick up light with their ‘eyes’ , and send that information to their brains. And there it is: information. The first information wasn’t communication. It was an organ sending signals to the storing place of signals: the brain.

    So brains were around now. And with species batteling each other for the best food and mates, the survival of the fittest became more and more important. Evolution went faster than ever, so brains also developed faster then ever. At this time, predators were already a thing.

    Later on species started to form groups and communicate with each other, that would eventually lead to social orders and at the very end, words and sentences. Verbal language. That’s how I think it came to be. Through evolution.

    What people mostly don’t realize about evolution, is that it’s a very slow proces. We can’t even imagine a thousand years, so million years just seams impossible. We live such a short time we can’t even imagine a long time. And that’s the key in understanding evolution: time. A long, long time. So just like with God: our brains aren’t able to fully understand it. All we can do is believe it. I don’t believe in God as most people do it, but I certainly believe it. I don’t think he’s a person. He’s way too complex for that. I think God’s something much bigger. I think god is something like evolution. It’s a just a therm we use to describe what is the thriving force behind life. What makes it what it is. I’m gonna ask you to read genesis 1 again, but instead of God, think of evolution.

    At the first day, the earth and heavens were created. That’s true in both the bible and science. It was the first thing.

    The second day. Creation of the skies, aka the atmosphere. Here’s were evolution kicks in. Small bacteria creating gasses make our atmosphere. This is the result of evolution according to most atheists. So that matches up.

    Day three. Creation of dry land. Both in science and Christianity accurate in the timeline.

    Day four. Creation of the stars and heavenly bodies. That isn’t exactly true according to science, but the moon was created later on by an other planet called Theia that crushed into the earth and also created the moon, so somehow this could match up. Plus the Bible has been translated way too much so we don’t know how much of it is still accurate, and we don’t know if all science is accurate, so there might be something wrong here.

    Anyways day five. God created life in the sea. Evolution created life in the sea. You see what I mean?

    Day six. God created life on land. Evolution did too. In both theories, life in the sea comes first, then on land.

    Day seven. Gods rests. This could easily be a metaphor for the fact that we humans are only seeing such a short period of time that it looks like evolution stopped. It went to rest. But it’s still there, it just goes so slow that we don’t notice it.

    So am I an atheist? Yes I am. But do I believe in God. Yes. In a way I do. I just don’t believe he is like a really special human, as most people see him. I think it’s bigger. Its always there, everywhere around us. It’s inside us. Its always been there, and it always will. It can’t die. It creates life, but it can also destroy it. We humans are probably the only species who cought a glimpse of it’s greatness. Wether you call it God, Allah, Buddha, or -like me- evolution. It is. And it will be.

    Thanks for reading!

  3. Jerry Gonzales says:

    “…I know I also just believe in atheism without being able to fully prove it.” Atheism is not a belief; it’s a lack of belief in a god. There’s no need to “prove” there is no god for that very reason. The same goes for the idea from believers in a god that “You can’t disprove there is a God.” There is no need to disprove something that has never been proven.

    • If you hope for atheism to have any intellectual respectability, atheism is, most certainly, some set of beliefs about where the universe came from, where life came from, where moral imperatives come from, how and why an exquisitely fine tuned universe can exist.

      Atheism is a set of propositions that must necessarily make some kind of rational account of the world and do so without a transcendent source.

      Sure, if you’re anti-intellectual, anti-knowledge, and anti-inquiry, then go ahead and say it’s “merely non-belief.”

      But you won’t get far with that here. It’s evasive and self-deception to claim that atheism is “non belief.”

      • Jerry Gonzales says:

        Sorry, you’re wrong. Not believing in a god, I don’t have a certain set of atheist beliefs that rule my life. Being pro-intellectual, pro-knowledge, and pro-inquiry is exactly why I know it is not a set of beliefs. For other mythical beings, do you have a certain set of beliefs for each of them? And I don’t mean the beliefs that guide you as a believer in god, that mat instruct you not to believe.

        • Jerry,

          Why is the universe controlled by orderly mathematical intelligible laws?
          Why is there anything at all instead of nothing?
          Why is the universe and its constants so incredibly fine tuned? (The force of the big bang for example had to be fine tuned to 120 decimal places or else stars would not have formed.)
          Where did life come from?
          How do you establish objective grounds for morality?

          Pick one and go.

  4. Jerry Gonzales says:

    I don’t care about any of these things, and I don’t need answers to them. While discussing life, a coworker once asked me, “Don’t you want to know why you’re here?” My answer was a “No” while thinking, “Who cares?”

    • I see. OK!

      Then YES, for you (who seemingly have no curiosity or interest in explaining anything rationally) then indeed atheism is simply “Non belief.”

      I have met very few people like you.

      But I still have to wonder what you were doing reading this article.

  5. Shayela Esquivel says:

    I support you. You are very courageous and brave to take a stand and be bold,honest and open about what you know. Thank you.

  6. Justin Perry says:

    I didn’t go through the comments so I am unsure if anyone has said this. I may be wrong and correct me if I am. you say “It is believed by some that life on planet earth arose accidentally from the “primordial soup,” the early ocean which produced enzymes and eventually RNA, DNA, and primitive cells.

    But there is still a problem with this theory: It fails to answer the question, ‘Where did the information come from?’

    DNA is not merely a molecule. Nor is it simply a “pattern.” Yes, it contains chemicals and proteins, but those chemicals are arranged to form an intricate language, in the exact same way that English and Chinese and HTML are languages.”

    First I would say accident implies intent it was not by an accident but by a process an algorithm of life so to speak that we are here. Next you ask Where the information came from I would suggest dropping the word “information” as it is misleading and using a word such as what it is Enzymes, DNA, RNA ect. and the answer that I would give you as a layman is I don’t know, I have degrees of knowledge and ideas at possibilities of how these things can arise but the Honest, intellectual truth is I am not 100% sure and you know what sometimes I don’t know is the answer. Not knowing as demonstrated by many religions is not equivalent nor does it imply a God/Gods did it. Next you attempt to say DNA is a type of language again it is best if we don’t muddle what things are. It is not a language no doubtfully you have heard an analogy of the two but that is precisely what it is an analogy we as humans have attributed to it. so the real riddle is without muddling up the definitions of what things are create a concrete argument as to how you know DNA is a language as your entire Salad of an argument depends on this.

  7. Subhendu Das says:

    “…every packet of information that zings across the Internet, is proof of the existence of God.” – There are two definitions of God (1) Christianity Definition – God is the creator of the entire universe (2) Bible Definition – “God is spirit”. Existence or production of information does not prove existence of none of the above kind of Gods.

    Here is a proof of that – Pat Norris came to see a visiting yogi from India during early 1970s in USA. When she entered the office of the yogi, he told the woman to ask seven questions and one by one she did. Then the yogi picked up a paper from his desk, turned it upside down, and gave that to her. In that paper all her questions were already written along with their answers.

    This example shows (1) what this woman will say was already written in somewhere which the yogi could read (2) Any high level yogi will be able to predict any event that will happen anywhere in the universe. (3) Every change in any physical object, including DNA, can be predicted. (4) Bible says – “There is nothing new under the sun.” Thus everything is already done. We cannot produce anything new. (5) Even an ordinary person can come to you, may ask you a question, in response you may predict your own future correctly. (6) Every soul knows all truths, only it cannot tell. (7) memory is not in our brain, or in our mind; it is in the universe. For more details please take a look at the yogic power chapter and also the destiny chapter in the free book at //theoryofsouls.wordpress.com/

  8. Theo Benschop says:

    Sjalom everybody! If you can read this sentence, there must be between your ears a machine that is doing a job.

    This job,

    as Mr. David Seldon has clearly explained, is interpreting what the meaning in a certain miraculous situation could be of if you can read this miraculous sentence.

    It appears that this miraculous machine is not starting with the first letter in trying to find out what this miraculous thing could be,

    but instead of this the miraculous machine “knows” that there must be a miraculous sentence that the miraculous eyes of the miraculous human being in one or the other miraculous way have presented to this miraculous machine that has a miraculous beginning and an miraculous end, that the miraculous sentence is containing miraculous letters, so that this miraculous machine is in a miraculous way decoding the whole miraculous sentence with miraculous letters in such a miraculous way that probably the miraculous braincells or the miraculous concious or the miraculous soul or something else miraculous between your miraculous ears are after these miraculous jobs between your miraculous ears in a miraculous way able to understand that the meaning of the miraculous sentence must be something like “Sjalom everybody!”

    The difficulty with the above mentioned miraculous letters that I in a miraculous way have been using is that I have forgotten to mention this, and this, and this, and that, and that, and that, and that I used the wrong words for this, and this, and this, and this, so that this maybe will go on until the end of time in a war with everybody who has a different point of view of this miraculous process between his or her miraculous ears.

    So in this stadium one can conclude that Mr. David Seldon took this miraculous risk in the history of mankind.

    So, correct me if I’m wrong, Mr. David Seldon has come to the conclusion that this miraculous process is designed by the miraculous Creator who designed this miraculous Creation with miraculous DNA codes and all kind of difficult miraculous scientific subjects that are in a miraculous way working at the background.

    So everybody understands at this point that what is at the background is happening must be more or less the same as what a computer is at the background is doing while he or she on the digital happy happy happy don’t worry be happy happy happy internet for instance is shopping for a nice holiday or something, and what a human being is doing when he or she walks to the market to buy healthy apples, bananas, vegetables, bread.

    He or she is not thinking what do I have to do for processes in order to buy something on the happy happy happy don’t worry be happy happy happy internet or in order to walk to the market to buy healthy apples, bananas, vegetables, bread for a fair price from my beloved brothers and sisters.

    No, certainly not. Human beings just don’t do this in order to stay peacefully in life.

    So one can conclude that human beings are most of the time very happy happy happy with these basics things: he or she has found out that these designed tools work perfectly as long he or she does’t stop on the road to the webshop or the market in order to think “Which proces will start a finger to click on the nice holiday or will start my right left leg, or right leg”. No, certainly not.

    So this must be since the beginning of mankind until the here and now of the experience of the first simple descendants of the first happy happy happy don’t worry be happy happy happy human beings.

    At this point Mr. David Seldon is making his conclusion I can prove God exists.

    So the processes between the miraculous ears will in the background do the designed miraculous jobs.

    And there it happens that one is able to conclude “I don’t believe that the in clear language speaking Mr. David Seldon at this point has proved anything. This already for the simple reason that one just should’t ask wether something is existing as everybody is able to see with his or her own designed miraculous eyes if something is existing or not existing. Everybody has been given enough miraculous braincells to figure out that nobody has witnessed the Big Bang, so that nobody is able to say “I just did a test, and guess what? I have proved that God is existing!”

    Did you really? I have always thought that this is a belief, but now you have proved it, that’s totally different, so now we are getting the science of the Roman Catholic, Moslim, Orhodox, Protestant God Universities instead of the churches and the mosque?

    So one can conclude at this point also the people of the Jewish religion don’t use the word God. Correct me if am wrong they are not allowed speak out a word about this subject. In this subject they write JAHWEH without the a en e, so JHWH or g_d.

    This is the same as in the Taoïsm, where the people say, correct me if I’m wrong, Tao is the road, the road is Tao.

    So if one is saying the mystery is solved, it has been proved that God is existing, the mystery is still existing.

    After the historic separation of church of state, this not absolutely, but in historic workable sense,

    respectivily the historic separation of the powers of the government of a sovereign nation in the Trias Politica,

    so the historic source code of the Checks and Balances system of Montesquieu upon all modern democracies that start with respect for minorities are built on,

    is it from a historic point of view clear that the religious people who believe in God can’t claim our God and our daalder, and pound and our dollar are the best of the whole world.

    Instead of this it would be a good thing that the science of the Roman Catholic, Moslim, Orhodox, Protestant God Universities make peacefully without one drop of senseless blood shedding war an update in their source code,

    so before the people of the Roman Catholic, Moslim, Orhodox, Protestant God Universities sign in the UN SABBATH SHALOM SABBATH SJALOM DONA NOBIS PACEM PEACE PALACE in the Hague in the former Western colonial laissez-faire passer business as usual the beautiful peaceful Royal Kingdom the Netherlands until the end a peace treaty that will last until the end of times.

  9. Redon Gega says:

    Im just dissecting one passage from the text up there:

    “Messages are not matter, even though they can be carried by matter (like printing this email on a piece of paper).

    Messages are not energy even though they can be carried by energy (like the sound of my voice.)

    Messages are immaterial. Information is itself a unique kind of entity. It can be stored and transmitted and copied in many forms, but the meaning still stays the same.”

    From what im getting here you are using the term “Message” and “information” interchangeably and what you mean by both is “meaning” or “meaningful information” (maybe im wrong)

    An atom of hydrogen has an exact mass and that is information that exists whether it has meaning or not it does work as “information” and it is “meaningful information” in regards to the force of gravity. Its electromagnetic information (charge) is not meaningful to gravity but it is to the electromagnetic force.

    When you say messages (or meaning im assuming) is not matter and is not energy then you are basically claiming that meaning doesnt exist. Because meaning requires two fundamental things, a matter based framework (the set of neurons in your brain) and energy (the electrochemical differences in that set of neurons that constitute the pattern for that particular meaning in your brain).

    What this argument to me seems to be leading to is the objective existence of meaning in the universe only because it exists in the mind of god, which i believe is similar to Berkeleys “to be is to be perceived”. Your claim that language cannot exist without a mind is identical but narrower than Berkeleys view (note also the parallel between his “subjective idealism” and your “messages are immaterial” again yours to a limited scope).

    I think you are making a lot of assumptions that are not justified in that paragraph that i quoted and in other places in the article, some regarding using different terms interchangeably.
    I think you have to clearly define what you mean by Messages, Information and Meaning. In case i got it wrong by conflating all three then i wait for an explanation but even so the statement that “meaning stays the same” i dont agree with. In 2000 years through evolution of language or the emergence of another language that by sheer luck uses english symbols and words but interprets them differently would constitute a scenario where the Message (defining it for my self as the symbols of the english language used in your text) would be the same and the Meaning (Interpretation of the reader) would be vastly different.

    Another assumption is your idea that language is tied to its creators/interpreters and if there is DNA and its a language of god then god exists just like English exists because there are English speakers. What if the speakers of the language disappear, is that a language in your definition, or is it now a language devoid of meaning, or are we just locked out of meaning.

    There’s a fundamental difference between information and interpretation in such a way as to extract meaning from it.

  10. Jack Ellis says:

    Here is some interesting research that would seem to suggest many of your assumptions about how life arises, and that complexity does not just arise from nothing, are potentially incorrect. Of course there is a long way to go, but it shows how things like DNA and RNA could arise without a ‘designer’.


Leave a Reply

You must use your real first and last name. Anonymity is not allowed.
Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are marked *