jsqaure99

true say, good example.; j3 a' @0 r, O- Y% c
by the way all i wanna say is that article is very naive.
( L! h0 i' x3 m$ Btrying to use our limited "smartness" to guess god's will.
, U1 u- {9 L" jno offence but i think whoever wrote it is stupid and him/her WILL SEE.

jsqaure99

TO sk﹕
! V+ @: T( @- u/ vNO OFFENCE
3 t) Q) K8 M9 N2 j8 B* `0 Y但請問如果我整容整到同你一樣
0 }" U3 m+ c( U係咪DNA都會同你一樣呢
# H& |9 j6 O# a$ UIMAGE又係咪解DNA呢
+ n  E4 f( w8 w) }: vIMAGE又係咪淨係解樣呢
$ b1 b8 n$ _5 Q1 a, G) c+ @% D我唔知3 \2 E$ @; T  T$ M9 T
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‘﹐
: N# _- L/ p# `9 x) ]會唔會覺得未夠班呢
" g: J+ f* Z3 O& [6 o9 H& U7 E人不能夠解釋神﹐就話神係假﹐係心靈上既托附
& t, a- V+ `2 j; |但係而家連挪亞方舟都慍到喇
+ |! T( \- Q+ i; J, v, U1 |  t又點解釋
: o' |6 N0 P6 _9 V# w
9 m4 D2 X4 z2 l; d/ Y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
# k! W( P* o4 h% V5 W3 y以為係大茶飯﹐點知連點CONTACT個網主都慍唔到1 |* Q! O& [. t9 h# E+ R
家常便飯有興趣去睇下佢既無知喇 .\

jsqaure99

反面教材
9 J. R0 ~4 y; i# S  R) `講得好( W/ M  o# @: ?+ x, F. O& {9 G& r
仲有D潑婦罵街FEEL添

jsqaure99

哈哈
- }: i! G+ F1 n2 q3 [) X0 j2 z9 e1 I我個人比夠口臭唔好意思

jsqaure99

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-7 07:01 PM:
5 p$ S* R5 f( C' f: n6 F2 Q3 Q, F) w6 }* f7 x  }

0 f3 i4 W- P- i証據...係要証實左既先叫証據
0 ]' p' l2 E3 w1 G; R& b, l6 f" D0 w3 j2 V1 `; _
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!

( g! q6 G" T8 W2 ~# X

+ t0 f$ P$ }, |& w. t
+ G& V, z/ e& O, g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﹗