jsqaure99

true say, good example.
3 L5 i0 J1 n( R4 x  u; aby the way all i wanna say is that article is very naive.: }# i; [# @# k
trying to use our limited "smartness" to guess god's will.
% M6 r. ~1 l. M2 U1 H" Sno offence but i think whoever wrote it is stupid and him/her WILL SEE.

jsqaure99

TO sk﹕
* n* `& A) S) P# v! ?NO OFFENCE
/ J8 R2 a  \( ?6 ^3 {1 T但請問如果我整容整到同你一樣1 |- y8 O( S( m8 ~# A3 ^- o
係咪DNA都會同你一樣呢) P! f) o# t7 o: ]4 y2 Y
IMAGE又係咪解DNA呢1 M8 r! n/ g! L2 ~8 z3 o! x7 l
IMAGE又係咪淨係解樣呢
! ]: m/ a) w" k2 [3 U6 e我唔知
: ^' F& o7 V4 m4 p+ g, m. h, Q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‘﹐& @1 L, i( L2 r8 Z, W3 }
會唔會覺得未夠班呢
! s( o# Y4 k' h# O9 [# f人不能夠解釋神﹐就話神係假﹐係心靈上既托附
# O6 U- `5 N4 ^) h, B) m8 U# I: v但係而家連挪亞方舟都慍到喇
  o) C# U1 o& ^- l' p又點解釋& J3 x6 j( X/ J- d0 K
4 D8 M  V7 `8 [* n+ {( ]7 A
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6 k7 e: c+ j0 }0 _
以為係大茶飯﹐點知連點CONTACT個網主都慍唔到1 F& m% P/ h* A! N* h1 H6 Z
家常便飯有興趣去睇下佢既無知喇 .\

jsqaure99

反面教材) |) I5 d- B+ C+ o, K- @
講得好
1 p: S, B9 F1 U! w5 R2 D0 N  q7 B仲有D潑婦罵街FEEL添

jsqaure99

哈哈: t  H. n3 `8 ~
我個人比夠口臭唔好意思

jsqaure99

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-7 07:01 PM:
% J2 n& Y% \! X; R- J% d5 s4 r1 e5 d2 P

9 _! R' O: C! i5 o# i証據...係要証實左既先叫証據7 K2 u1 N$ U, p7 e

7 R4 N$ Y. n3 d8 {5 t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!

9 ]/ P2 d% A6 ^' z! d: ^( \
  A3 M$ G' ?% A1 L
" g" M# s7 W% |8 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﹗