jsqaure99

true say, good example.+ x# F2 n% y8 O, X# }! X6 T* h
by the way all i wanna say is that article is very naive.$ j, M3 I3 h6 d8 O1 p
trying to use our limited "smartness" to guess god's will.
6 x: [. m* N7 {$ R, zno offence but i think whoever wrote it is stupid and him/her WILL SEE.

jsqaure99

TO sk﹕/ j: ~8 i, Z: ~5 q
NO OFFENCE
& E5 \. d4 A3 R/ u5 U& C. s/ u1 J但請問如果我整容整到同你一樣
" c# Z! C- B  A2 b4 X係咪DNA都會同你一樣呢; ^+ {5 l9 C  S; W) v' d: Z9 {
IMAGE又係咪解DNA呢
7 R+ G, U) u( I. W: `2 E5 YIMAGE又係咪淨係解樣呢
- K9 Y3 k+ p* ?- G$ E我唔知
$ K  V' [' G9 C2 `, q0 \. N" c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‘﹐
. W3 v- J# Y1 e1 y2 f2 ~6 C5 f會唔會覺得未夠班呢: ?7 s, [- G# M. Y$ C9 J$ E
人不能夠解釋神﹐就話神係假﹐係心靈上既托附
) l& {* F* a3 c, T8 o但係而家連挪亞方舟都慍到喇
- E2 U) x) C5 \8 ]7 o* G0 u又點解釋7 i$ _+ x- v7 n' w& u) b

: ~6 x& J+ ?* S8 E* B. L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0 p1 [4 ^) U& t, S
以為係大茶飯﹐點知連點CONTACT個網主都慍唔到* a. j" g- \6 m" d. ?, G5 L
家常便飯有興趣去睇下佢既無知喇 .\

jsqaure99

反面教材
) U' v# o6 U0 d8 B講得好; N- _. W7 B& i/ F8 z0 c' I  \
仲有D潑婦罵街FEEL添

jsqaure99

哈哈+ Z# b4 p- h/ v- @- b
我個人比夠口臭唔好意思

jsqaure99

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-7 07:01 PM:
9 x, e( ^. d( F$ z+ h+ j. @3 N7 S2 e) c8 X
9 k+ X1 Q! ^0 W+ r6 {) g
証據...係要証實左既先叫証據4 w, _' l1 K+ @6 S" h
2 n" N! B- s, M6 W0 }
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!

* m3 V( u5 @% S. P* V( C8 {1 ~* {& ^5 M

3 ~/ @( r. ^' e* |* F) @0 n# ~0 n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﹗