jsqaure99

true say, good example.
7 m8 c3 x( ~5 T# Y3 C. eby the way all i wanna say is that article is very naive.
9 D- S4 _/ H+ D  `6 vtrying to use our limited "smartness" to guess god's will.6 M/ D- a0 C, t6 T
no offence but i think whoever wrote it is stupid and him/her WILL SEE.

jsqaure99

TO sk﹕! x7 `( m* c4 b
NO OFFENCE
: H+ M; _5 c% Z9 |# U3 Q但請問如果我整容整到同你一樣* U6 d6 W0 ?5 g0 z
係咪DNA都會同你一樣呢
" f6 T5 U8 _) u0 O! y& Y  a. AIMAGE又係咪解DNA呢/ _4 _/ g7 ^& C6 l/ O4 I
IMAGE又係咪淨係解樣呢$ ?9 E7 N0 ^0 ]0 I' I
我唔知
) r: t+ p; }0 Q. ?2 @- F但係人用現今不完整既科學﹐好似DNA既理論黎攻激神既”創世‘﹐
7 w' y7 o9 o: v會唔會覺得未夠班呢+ H! q' g5 J6 M+ t) p; y
人不能夠解釋神﹐就話神係假﹐係心靈上既托附9 ]6 }+ m/ O8 ?' ?7 @5 d3 n5 K
但係而家連挪亞方舟都慍到喇+ a# O0 X5 I' h& f+ a# W7 L
又點解釋  }4 `1 S# r/ O0 l" V  k( t
1 z1 r/ m: r% h, s7 n9 N% f
仲有果個網址我已經去過﹐寫網人只係一個唔識解經既人(什至忽略左好多好多既DETAIL)﹐佢既網址簡直不值一看。

jsqaure99

我就敗興而回# R: o% s; \) P/ M# A6 Z
以為係大茶飯﹐點知連點CONTACT個網主都慍唔到( R7 p% Z8 A  ~! R
家常便飯有興趣去睇下佢既無知喇 .\

jsqaure99

反面教材
7 w* W! F, r6 p) t講得好1 `* b9 B- P( ?" Y1 X! s1 ^1 ?  R
仲有D潑婦罵街FEEL添

jsqaure99

哈哈  m3 u; Z. A; R, U' P: X, ]6 Y
我個人比夠口臭唔好意思

jsqaure99

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-7 07:01 PM:4 K8 E/ q, l& O" _

  o% A- Y$ F6 V  U9 `+ D! C1 F1 }5 s3 b8 N5 j& ^' H, j
証據...係要証實左既先叫証據2 B1 W+ ]% b# q) D6 G; G) C! _
8 X' V% h' [7 d# h3 K
用眼去睇下個隆就話係...又唔做下"碳14"確定下年分??? 見到d對自己有利既所謂証據就認屎認屁認唔切...悲哀!

5 M4 g( I: W# ~; A
/ s! n: ~+ O- R# R; [2 z7 {

6 ]; A) U6 f  K5 H唔係想話你﹐不個你經常用錯既EXAMPLE同經證實既謠言黎BACKUP自己會唔會唔好意思﹖當然大家希望多些人發言﹐但請你先做RESEARCH﹗