jsqaure99

true say, good example.
! Z6 }( V0 f8 R; O9 n+ q7 Vby the way all i wanna say is that article is very naive.
7 [/ N- L' i7 j; o- O* ^8 B; [  itrying to use our limited "smartness" to guess god's will.8 t0 u% F  x" j
no offence but i think whoever wrote it is stupid and him/her WILL SEE.

jsqaure99

TO sk﹕. ]7 l" I8 d0 M5 a& s) S% x
NO OFFENCE
* i2 @/ i9 y, a5 m- `0 `. I但請問如果我整容整到同你一樣& F% }/ Q$ [. G- a8 j3 Z
係咪DNA都會同你一樣呢, N( A  `4 O! V0 \' {
IMAGE又係咪解DNA呢
( g2 _3 X5 e, ?, ]. I+ a' xIMAGE又係咪淨係解樣呢- j* Q% W# c4 j4 c8 l9 ~5 Y
我唔知
+ M* L8 j/ M& y) Q1 P; L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 w( x# O# n/ V/ X
會唔會覺得未夠班呢
$ d5 x! Q" ?. r0 `# Z  R! _人不能夠解釋神﹐就話神係假﹐係心靈上既托附2 ]3 S' x' j! t. `! V: C
但係而家連挪亞方舟都慍到喇) z* O, T5 `# H
又點解釋4 O# t( z9 c% Y8 j7 n  }4 p* C
8 J5 P5 k. S; v" H4 O3 \2 |' {- 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
$ i- W0 u3 z3 `0 x$ B' ]2 d' Q以為係大茶飯﹐點知連點CONTACT個網主都慍唔到
2 {* L  Y8 b4 f* W4 p家常便飯有興趣去睇下佢既無知喇 .\

jsqaure99

反面教材0 M; A( p5 V7 w8 J6 A
講得好3 c  G( `. D6 c9 s9 d/ S3 T$ l# w
仲有D潑婦罵街FEEL添

jsqaure99

哈哈
! d: o& s7 b( c5 c* L/ D$ u我個人比夠口臭唔好意思

jsqaure99

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-7 07:01 PM:  s, \% L, _4 X
! ?: X6 V! o0 a4 @; `
. k% \$ C- C5 n/ b
証據...係要証實左既先叫証據4 j. V- r* P1 W: I+ e

8 w& C5 Y9 G: t8 o& W) x, ]! s2 q+ V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!

8 v; d' I, V! r  k/ s
$ k' }; i2 ]# u  Z$ Y
& _" [! f; O7 a4 W9 Q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﹗