jsqaure99

true say, good example.9 L: j9 }; a4 A7 H
by the way all i wanna say is that article is very naive.3 ?- w$ `, S' f) |3 F9 X# y
trying to use our limited "smartness" to guess god's will.
8 ?+ K9 w9 O: C- t6 D4 Z, T. r5 B0 eno offence but i think whoever wrote it is stupid and him/her WILL SEE.

jsqaure99

TO sk﹕
: a! @1 B: N% @  A9 c# X; z! vNO OFFENCE & c& Z1 U" F  C
但請問如果我整容整到同你一樣* S5 V4 @% e# \4 b) S; L3 i. n4 F/ `
係咪DNA都會同你一樣呢1 ?% j& N5 N- V; a+ D
IMAGE又係咪解DNA呢8 g8 @8 B0 w% \
IMAGE又係咪淨係解樣呢
) r+ q) o# N: \0 M2 t- v0 l我唔知' g- V' N4 t0 m; s* \; y
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‘﹐& s4 D- w4 L3 h; L" p+ s: N8 P$ A, M5 @
會唔會覺得未夠班呢
5 a6 v7 A6 @% Z3 _人不能夠解釋神﹐就話神係假﹐係心靈上既托附0 W% x, k& ?) i7 U# K+ h
但係而家連挪亞方舟都慍到喇5 Y, C; {8 _# W
又點解釋
" O1 s. w5 T" d# `* n8 _4 T/ N- v) m& b. W
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* U* ^5 {, ]) `* @; a: e
以為係大茶飯﹐點知連點CONTACT個網主都慍唔到
, F9 S  v& L7 d+ u) n5 f8 t* y家常便飯有興趣去睇下佢既無知喇 .\

jsqaure99

反面教材
& D7 M5 d! c: ?  u4 ]" D+ f講得好1 E8 g# k5 J0 L
仲有D潑婦罵街FEEL添

jsqaure99

哈哈  T7 L) _/ l5 A' m% m* h4 J- w
我個人比夠口臭唔好意思

jsqaure99

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-7 07:01 PM:
8 g* Z- Y# {4 b) R6 F! @4 y
. z8 K) }8 Z, r6 G
. d% Q! x8 V4 @8 D, ~0 j証據...係要証實左既先叫証據$ z- D* ]- m% p/ H3 _

; r8 Q2 H0 j+ w! B5 c/ n) m  Y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!

. [2 D, ]) S  u3 u$ H, x2 e8 b5 K2 ^1 t. y2 c8 ~
' f  ~* t0 B! K, M2 _1 y
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﹗