jsqaure99

true say, good example.' ]% W; b2 ^5 d2 I1 ~/ G7 l% C
by the way all i wanna say is that article is very naive.# m9 N9 l; Y; J% \& O% K1 V) C7 U( U" ~
trying to use our limited "smartness" to guess god's will.
; I  D/ x" t* b  A% m" c  {4 @no offence but i think whoever wrote it is stupid and him/her WILL SEE.

jsqaure99

TO sk﹕
9 `* A  X. x1 V) i* b( nNO OFFENCE 2 T9 ^; N* F: z+ F  U" E  c
但請問如果我整容整到同你一樣; h9 I) u$ a- B4 {, n
係咪DNA都會同你一樣呢
: z$ x9 J. U. V4 n3 i' XIMAGE又係咪解DNA呢
+ E5 ]/ c- ]/ W) C. _1 S* IIMAGE又係咪淨係解樣呢
9 Q4 d9 C  R3 J. c; V- O我唔知! p. k3 V/ Y! R# Y# E- m0 }
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‘﹐
$ X/ ~& F+ l+ G. S7 z# ]會唔會覺得未夠班呢9 `: F+ J1 l6 h% p" p; z0 C
人不能夠解釋神﹐就話神係假﹐係心靈上既托附
7 q% m( J! v, K7 U0 r( I+ c7 s但係而家連挪亞方舟都慍到喇
5 v# `/ L  q- K. d8 P$ V/ k又點解釋, |0 K- a% T$ W! c* n# i# q  L

" X7 S  B6 S) r  n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3 g1 L4 w1 i; h8 e. ?2 _
以為係大茶飯﹐點知連點CONTACT個網主都慍唔到
- H% R, u8 K( ?7 x6 z$ z家常便飯有興趣去睇下佢既無知喇 .\

jsqaure99

反面教材' n3 S7 l9 x: O
講得好
% h) ~1 a3 q. [2 t6 V- W5 i1 w& A1 d仲有D潑婦罵街FEEL添

jsqaure99

哈哈
% ?2 g" l3 r! E8 K我個人比夠口臭唔好意思

jsqaure99

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-7 07:01 PM:3 B. a' `$ k9 T+ M9 B9 Q5 `
) D" O  O2 L2 P. Q
0 R9 A! q2 K, d) k" r
証據...係要証實左既先叫証據
: R+ Y: k8 [, N# Q% X8 p. t! N# k/ }* O& o/ m  B6 {3 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!

; |/ s3 y6 d# Y* e6 {
) {" ^+ e2 r8 _! w5 [: ]! {

$ g1 C8 t9 y6 m" P- m. c% `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﹗